"Let’s talk about Roberts. I’m going to tell you something that you’re not going to hear anywhere else, that you must pay attention to. It’s well known that Roberts, unfortunately for him, has suffered from epileptic seizures. Therefore he has been on medication. Therefore neurologists will tell you that medication used for seizure disorders, such as epilepsy, can introduce mental slowing, forgetfulness and other cognitive problems. And if you look at Roberts’ writings you can see the cognitive dissociation in what he is saying."Well, yes. I still remember the Bush administration, when almost every cabinet resignation or other conservative slight was followed by a press room briefing or other high-placed rant on how so-and-so was obviously either bitter or crazy. It goes without saying that you would have to be hopped up on epilepsy medication to think that other people maybe ought to receive their goddamn epilepsy medication.
Now Savage's—let's call it "theory," I suppose—has made to Fox News. Fox News Radio's Todd Starnes (who already holds title for most frothing conservative reaction to yesterday's ruling, with his announcement that we "are now living in the Occupied United States of America," is taking it and running with it:
"[T]he reason people are stunned is because what John Roberts did. And there is growing estimation that he did this, uh, for political reasons, and not necessarily to follow the rule of law, which is troubling. We've seen other reports out there that suggest that perhaps some of Mr., you know the Chief Justice is on medication, and perhaps that might have influenced his decision-making, I don't know. But I do know this, it was so out of character that you really have to wonder what really was going on.Hey, we've seen reports, folks. And that's not all the reports we've seen. In less mapped caves of wingnuttery, there are even darker suppositions that need supposing. So many suppositions are being supposed that I'm supposing supposition suppositories may be suspected:
(Continued below the fold ...)
One lower-tier righty blogger (by the name of "Reliapundit," no less, so you know it's got to be legit, and no I'm not linking, Google if you care, etc.) says:
Aaaaaaaah! It burns! You shouldn't have read below the fold after all!SPECULATION: THIS IS MERELY A GAMING SCENARIO: IF OBAMA THREATENED TO KILL CHELSEA, THEN MIGHT HE THREATEN A JUSTICE OF THE SCOTUS TO SAVE OBAMACARE?IT WOULD EXPLAIN WHY ROBERTS CHANGED HIS MIND. AND WHY HIS OPINION IS SO DISJOINTED.
BETTINA VIVIANO CLAIMS THAT IN 2008 OBAMA CRONIES THREATENED TO KILL CHELSEA TO GET THE CLINTONS TO BACK DOWN FROM USING THE BIRTHER ALLEGATIONS AGAINST OBAMA.
IF THIS IS TRUE - REPEAT IF, THEN IT IS EQUALLY POSSIBLE THAT THESE SAME CRONIES MIGHT THREATEN TO KILL ONE OF CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS' CHILDREN IN ORDER TO GET HIM TO VOTE FOR OBAMACARE. [...]
IF THIS IS TRUE - REPEAT IF, THEN IT IS EQUALLY POSSIBLE THAT THESE SAME CRONIES MIGHT THREATEN TO KILL ONE OF CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS' CHILDREN IN ORDER TO GET HIM TO VOTE FOR OBAMACARE.