The SBOTUS Decision on ObamaCare

God can read minds. Man can’t.

One need not be Christian, Jew, or Muslim to know that. An atheist will tell you that although God is no more than a myth, that mythical God has the power to know what’s in the heart of man. The atheist will surely admit that no mere human being has the power to know what resides in the deepest recesses of a persons mind. He’ll tell you that no individual or group of individuals, however educated, erudite, or sagacious, possess the power of full and complete knowledge of another individual or group of individuals.

Apparently, of the seven-plus billion persons here on this planet, we mere humans are lucky enough to have within our midst six people who have just such a divine knowledge.

Thus the title of this article.

In a 6 to 3 decision today, the six Supreme Beings of the United States have handed down their bestowal, boldly ignoring the law, as is their sole and only duty, and looked into the hearts of the writers of The Affordable Care Act, delving into their real and true ‘intent’ when they wrote the ObamaCare bill.

Roberts, Kennedy, Ginsburg, Sotomayor, Breyer, and Kagan upheld ObamaCare. Scalia, Alito, and Thomas. Dissented.

The law as written, regarding the system that shall be in place, detailed it’s functional mechanism for implementation with the words,

“Exchange established by the State.”

That’s all. “Exchange established by the State.”

Oh, but you see, the six Supreme Beings on the Supreme Court were able to look beyond what the writers penned and used their divining dust to find out that what the law’s writers really meant. No but I mean for real, like . . . totally, what they really really meant. It seems what they like totally really really meant when they said, “Exchange established by the State,” they really meant, “Exchange established by the State or Federal Government,” as Scalia said in his dissent.

“That is of course quite absurd,” said Scalia, “and the Court’s 21 pages of explanation make it no less so.”


“Words no longer have meaning if an Exchange that is not established by the State is ‘established by the State.'”

The Leftists on the Supreme Court have demonstrated today in flaring colors what I’ve always maintained, that is, Liberal judges don’t interpret the law, as is their specified responsibility in their duly limited Constitutional capacity as allowed. Conservative judges do. Conservative judges realize they are not to correct inadequate laws from the bench, they are not possessed with the power to change a law if they don’t feel that it is good enough. Very UN-LIKE gods, Conservative judges merely interpret the law as it lay before them.

However, that is far too restrictive for a Liberal judge. To a Liberal judge, what they are to do is look down at the cases From On High, then decide “what’s the right and good thing.”

For Libs, when a case is brought before a judge concerning, lets say, fraud, where Bob directed money from his bosses bank account to his wife’s bank account. Okay, a Conservative judge will look at the law and say, Yes, that employee is guilty of committing fraud. The Liberal judge says, Wait a minute – since the guy really, really needed the money, then it wasn’t fraud.

Okay, so what is it, then?

Well, it’s . . . well, it’s . . . not very nice.

It’s fraud. No matter how much the guy needed the money, it’s still FRAUD.

What’s wrong with you, can’t you see he’s hurting?


No, idiot, if he’s NOT hurting for the money, then it’s fraud, but if he’s hurting really really bad for the money, then it’s, uh, . . . not very nice.

See how it works? Liberal judges don’t interpret the law, they interpret the heart.

Liberal judges in the Dred Scott case thought it right to call black people less than fully human and keep slavery.

Liberal judges in the Roe vs. Wade case thought it right that babies should be murdered if mothers want to murder them.

See? Clear as a bell.

In a sense, I have to agree with them. Now hold on, walk with me here. If the words of a case make no difference, but it is rather the real true intent of the heart that is to be divined, as is the case with ObamCare, then Roberts and the other five gods made the right decision.

Hey, it worked for Adolph Hitler, Joseph Stalin, Mao Zedong, and Dylann Roof, why not the six ‘oracle keepers’ on the Supreme Court?

However, all of this is irrelevant.

The only thing that’s relevant is very simply, did the Libs get what they want? If the Supreme Court would’ve said that they are upholding Obamacare because little blue fairies whispered peaches’n’cream poetry in their ears, that would have been just fine with Liberals. Nothing, ABSOLUTELY NOTHING! matters to a Lib except getting their ends met. The means are simply the tools, and those tools can be any and everything as long as it works.

It’s a sad day for our nation.

Get ready for the scrolls and bowls.

About the Author

Joe Keck is a writer of horror, thriller, suspense, and other fiction, some poetry and music, with the occasional op-ed piece on current events, politics, and theology. Although born in Oklahoma, he was taken to Los Angeles when he was an infant, or as his mother described, "the ugliest little thing I've ever seen", and raised there on the West Coast. He considers himself to be far superior to most on the artistic merits of film and literature, seeing the vast majority of such to be well below adequate. He has four novels and many short stories to his credit, and hopes to one day have them published, promising to hold critics like himself in harsh derision. He's currently restoring a Jason 35 sailboat and plans to sail the world, writing horror stories, and marveling at the illustrative works of the Creator and His Divine story-telling imagery. You may Find Joe's Website at

Author Archive Page

Post a Comment