Thoughts on SCOTUS ruling on Obamacare

Trying to keep up with all that's been written about last week's SCOTUS ruling on Obamacare has left me feeling a bit dizzy. One thing is certain - the ruling seemed to catch everyone off guard. Some folks on the left (see Chris Matthews) were decrying the "conservative SCOTUS" a few days before the ruling, and have since sung the praises of Chief Justice Roberts. Some conservatives (Krauthammer, Will) admire the cleverness in Roberts' ruling, seeing it as a Solomonic judgment which kept the SCOTUS above the fray of partisan politics, while others (e.g. Bozell) lament the ruling as a Judas-like betrayal.

Perhaps a more fitting comparison is Pontius Pilate, especially now that there are reports that Roberts initially ruled with the 4 dissenting Justices, but later changed his opinion. Like Pilate, Roberts seems to hold private convictions different from his official ruling. His words that it's not the job of SCOTUS "to protect the people from the consequences of their political choices" seem to wash his hands of the matter, returning the case to the people to make the final judgment.

And in one sense, perhaps that is as it should be. While I disagree with the decision & much of the logic of the ruling, wasn't it just a touch hypocritical for conservatives to pin their hopes on a SCOTUS ruling after railing against "judicial activism" for decades?

Before fellow conservatives go on a witch hunt against Roberts, keep in mind that the Affordable Care Act passed by just one vote. 17 Democratic Senators who voted for the ACA were newly elected in 2006 or 2008, while Republican voter turnout those years was not nearly as strong as in 2010. If ever there were an object lesson to disprove the oft-repeated mantra "my vote doesn't matter, all politicians are the same", this is it. Remember this November: your vote matters!