John Roberts retreats to Malta to teach history

Teaching a two week class on Mediterranean island

Disappointing U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts recently chuckled that he’d be spending some time on an “impregnable island fortress” after the court concluded its session. It turns out that Roberts is scheduled to teach a two-week class, “The History of the Supreme Court,” on the island nation of Malta. His topic should more correctly be “A Study in Collaboration.”

The Chief Justice has become reviled by conservatives since writing the opinion and casting the deciding vote — in concert with the court liberals — to uphold the monstrosity known as ObamaCare, a massive governmental overreach.

History is an intriguing topic for instructor Roberts to take on. Historians will recall Marshal Pétain’s 1940 speech to the French people after meeting Adolf Hitler in which he declared: “I am today setting out along the road of collaboration.” Formerly a WWI French military hero, Pétain was later convicted as a traitor for heading the pro-Nazi Vichy regime after France’s defeat in World War II.

Here Michael Gerson, an op-ed columnist for the left-leaning Washington Post takes him on, in  John Roberts’ Arrogance, dissecting Roberts’ interpretation of the health care law Gerson concludes “This is not an alternate reading but an alternate universe.”


14 Responses to John Roberts retreats to Malta to teach history

  1. Fed Up says:

    John Roberts should be taking, rather than teaching a course….in the US Constitution and its parameters! I am thoroughly disgusted by his overreach into our lives and personal health care decisions.

  2. Stanford says:

    Interesting, isn’t it, that Democrat presidents are never betrayed by their Supreme Court picks? Liberals stay left, moving further so once on the court. It’s only the Republicans who are duped. Portraying herself as a conservative, Sandra O’Connor pulled a fast one on Ronald Reagan after she doffed her sheep’s clothing and revealed herself as a leftie. And as Michael Gerson rightly points out in his post, Eisenhower called his appointment of Earl Warren the .”biggest damned-fool mistake I ever made.” Ditto George H.W. Bush’s appointment of liberal David Souter. When did a liberal ever come out as a conservative after getting their lifetime appointment? I can’t think of a single one.

    • garvan says:

      You’re correct: I know of no liberal jurist who has ever moved right.

      The problem with Eisenhower, Reagan and Bush Senior is that they did not properly vet their candidates. They merely took the recommendations of underlings.

      If I were president I would get personally acquainted with a Sup Ct candidate, i.e. spend many one-on-one hours with him at the same time my staff would be reading every single thing the guy or gal had ever written since high school.

      Sadly, presidents spend more time on agenda items that have very little real-world relevance compared to what a Sup Ct justice can do to the nation.

  3. MacBeth says:

    Dubya Bush would have been better off staying with White House counsel, Harriet Miers and then appointing Samuel Alito instead of Roberts. At least Miers was a lifelong and known conservative.

  4. Kent says:

    Gerson’s editorial was printed in today’s AZ Republic. The newspaper deceptively altered his column removing all of this at the beginning:
    The Simpsons on unpredictable judges:
    Marge: “Do you want your son to become chief justice of the Supreme Court, or a sleazy male stripper?”
    Homer: “Can’t he be both, like the late Earl Warren?”
    Marge: “Earl Warren wasn’t a stripper!”
    Homer: “Now who’s being nave.”

    Then the rag passing as a newspaper came in mid sentence:
    Warren’s actual vices tended more toward the ideological. (PERIOD)

    Here’s the rest of what the dishonest and aptly nicknamed named “AZ Repugnant” actually omitted:

    Warren’s actual vices tended more toward the ideological. Dwight Eisenhower came to regret the liberal activism of his choice for the Supreme Court, calling it the “biggest damned-fool mistake I ever made.”
    These people at the Republic are puveyors of sleaze and fakery, altering the words of columnists in such a manner displays their disregard for truth. It’s obvious the think we are fools. We are if we continue to buy this sh*t. I’m canceling today. Join me.

    • garvan says:

      Why would anybody pay good money to any liberal rag? I get 99% of my news from the internet.

      I’m told the main reason many people keep on subscribing to newspapers in general is to read things like the obits. But these can be read for free on the paper’s website.

      It’s time for someone to print up a bumper sticker: BOYCOTT THE AZ REPUBLIC.

      Then start phoning advertisers, telling them you’re boycotting them as long as they spend money at the Republic.

      Boycotts work. Rush took a multi-million dollar hit over his Sandra Fluck comments.

      Make those liberal bastards at the Republic pay for their warped politics.

      • Sgt. Preston says:

        The boycott is an excellent idea, garvan!!
        Here is the contact information for two large local advertisers:
        Moon Valley Nurseries

        Spencer’s Appliances

        Also look up specific valley car dealers. You can do that since I’ve done the heavy lifting for you with the two mega advertisers above.

        I’m more inclined to ignore grocery stores since people shop weekly bargain specials which benefit them in this terrible economy.

  5. Not Fooled says:

    Yep! It was not only reconfigured, but carried a much different headline. BTW, Gerson worked for George W. Bush as a chief speechwriter and senior policy adviser.

    Here’s the column as it was intended to appear in it’s original source the Washington Post:

  6. garvan says:

    Good article from Gerson.

    But let’s not forget he was the force behind Dubya’s unneeded and bank-breaking prescription drug boondoggle, not to mention his STUPID and counterproductive “No Child Left Behind” travesty.

    Gerson was also Bush’s chief pusher of the fiction that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction.

    With “conservatives” like Gerson and David Brooks, his counterpart at the NYT, who needs liberals?

  7. LD 7 PC says:

    Another good analysis. This one is by Marc Thiessen asks “Why are Republicans so awful at picking Supreme Court justices?” Thiessen was chief speechwriter to President George W. Bush and Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld working at the Pentagon during the September 11 Islamic terrorist attacks.

    Here he hits on some very strong points.

  8. Realist says:

    Roberts is a cowardly fool who may have just put the final nail in the coffin of the republic.

    • garvan says:

      C’mon now, Realist. Can you blame him? His wife Jane has been hounding him for years to move to the left so they can get invited to a cocktail party at Sally Quinn’s Georgetown mansion.

  9. Geri Ottoboni-Gilmore says:

    Don’t knock MALTA, if you havn’t been there. I have been there and it might be a good place for him to get “all his ducks in a row”

%d bloggers like this: