Diary

The Unbearable LightHeadedness of John Roberts

America’s Chief Justice has a problem. Twice wobbled by seizures, his brain has gone wobbly.

To confirm, we may have to wait for this once brilliant man to die, well after all the damage has been done. Or we could soon learn a secret only his honest doctor knows for sure: is John Roberts on medications to help prevent seizures?

If so, what are the even possible effects on his brain? If not, what, in any case, are the brain effects after his generalized seizures in 1993 and 2007?

At least 2 neuroscientists have declared that Roberts’ seizures were generalized, i.e, affecting his entire brain. One of them, Dr. Steven Novella, wrote that generalized seizures are caused by “some defect in the brain,” or by such stresses as sleep deprivation, alcohol use or withdrawal, high fever, certain drugs, low blood sugar and other “metabolic derangements.”

After Robert’s second seizure 8 years ago, his neurological exam concluded and revealed that the Chief Justice had a medical condition known as “idiopathic epilepsy.” For reasons open to discussion, the Chief Justice’s 2007 diagnosis of idiopathic epilepsy was preceded by the adjective “benign.” His evaluation was described as “not revealing anything concerning.”

These days, as with most assessments, if the diagnosis was made by a doctor like Michael Jackson’s, Americans would be concerned. If Roberts’ doctor was the neurological equivalent of Dr. David Samadi, we would not.

Neuroscientist Steven Novella explained that the term “idiopathic” is “a fancy way of saying we don’t know what is causing” Roberts’ seizures. While it’s not yet clear whether doctors still do not know, cannot or will not say, Novella believes it’s unlikely the Chief Justice takes anti-seizure meds, because his overall health is good and there was a 14-year gap between his 2 seizures.

Again, in Dr. Novella’s opinion (written in July, 2008), “it is likely Roberts will do just fine,” although “there is a small chance that something has changed in Roberts’ brain.” According to this one neuroscientist, there is also “a small chance that in order to control his seizures, he will require enough medications to cause significant side effects.”

I first began to ponder the “seizure effect” in 2012. Suddenly Souter, Conservative Chief Justice Roberts expressed his most glaringly inconsistent opinion: in support of Liberal ObamaCare; at odds with the Conservative Reagan and Bush ’41 supporter he was.

Sure, heathly people should learn, improve and grow; hence, the adage: “If you aren’t a Conservative after 35 (the new 21), you have no brain.” But once the brain of an honest man has matured, as it did in the case of America’s equally brilliant Dr. Charles Krauthammer, there’s no going back from bedrock….unless the brain has become impaired.

Avowed Reagan and Bush ’41 Conservatives connected to the Federalist Society don’t vote with the Liberal wing of the Supreme Court unless something’s wobbled their minds or worse.  After all, if Liberals had logical, unwobbly brains, they’d be Conservatives.

Of course, Justice Scalia is right: Robert’s  King V. Burwell doublespeak decision is as messy as applesauce, to put it politely. Having declared on 6/25/15 that the meaning of “is” is “not,” Robert’s conclusions reveal a mushier brain, more like Justice Kennedy’s and Kagan’s than Roberts’ steel trap of yesteryear.

Somewhere in John Roberts’ summa mix, well before his geriatric years, it is reasonable to conclude that something happened, at least intermittently, to produce applesauce where apples used to be.

Last week in King v Burwell, Roberts’ ruling in favor of Burwell/ ObamaCare violated his own principles expressed in 2004: “the question before us…is not whether these policies were a bad (or good) idea, but whether they violated the Constitution.”

Conservative Richard Grenell put it this way: “it’s almost as if Roberts’ rulings (for invisible words on 6/25 and against finding invisible rights in the Constitution on 6/26) were “written by 2 different people.”

What if they were? What if our Chief Justice was literally not in his “right mind” when, on 6/25, he drew his frighteningly Clintonian conclusions about plain “Indiana English”?

It was almost as if Roberts’ sharp conservative twin appeared in court the next day, the same man who once did pro-bono legal work for gays.  On 6/26, after opposing his colleagues for concocting a Constitutional right for gays to marry, this Chief Justice fumed “Just who do we think we are?”

Millions of Conservatives and other apple-lovers have long wondered the same. Now common sense citizens have the right to wonder who they are. More than masked,  some of these Justices can no longer be viewed as Supreme. Like the president they serve, at least 2 of them have violated their oaths to uphold America’s Constitution, period.

“Period Conservatives” know the meaning of “is.” The other side is filled with ‘Comma Liberals,” happy to go with the meaning of “Clintons.” In spirited free-for-alls, these excruciatingly imprecise Liberals add commas, drown words and mash meaning.  Robed in black,  the judges speak with restrained voices, but their invalid rulings resound to further reduce America.

For America to endure, our Founders expected her clear-brained people to fight against anti-Constitutional government transgressions. A few Senators, Governors and Judicial Watch can’t do it all alone.