Obama flashback: Roberts and Alito are super-qualified but I’m voting no anyway

posted at 6:28 pm on June 1, 2009 by Allahpundit

Prepare for the inevitable media finger-wagging towards Republicans who vote no on Sotomayor by refreshing your memory of how The One treated two eminent jurists while a member of the Senate. The clip of his Alito speech is shorter and more ironic — he worries about a judge who’d side with the executive branch in matters like (gasp!) indefinite detention — but the Roberts clip gives you a better feel for just how stupid and dishonest his litmus test is. Here again we have the talismanic invocation of “empathy” as the touchstone for deciding cases where the law isn’t clear; as near as I can tell, “empathy” means a judge should determine which party is the weaker of the two and rule for them on that basis alone unless the relevant governing cases and statutes are so clear as to compel a verdict for the stronger. In other words, he doesn’t want judges who’ll reason from principles to arrive at an outcome; he wants them to arrive at the outcome first, wherever possible, and then reason backwards to justify the decision. Not only is that antithetical to the concept of a rule of law, it reduces complex questions involving competing values to moronic binary calculations about “the strong versus the weak.” For example, as liberal as it was, even the Warren Court never went so far as to declare a constitutional right to welfare, no doubt realizing how crippling that sort of entitlement would be to future Congresses notwithstanding its sympathy for the poor. In the Obamaverse, though, that’s an easy case: Who’s weaker, the Treasury Department or people living below the poverty line? Empathy to the rescue!


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

butthead….

SDarchitect on June 1, 2009 at 6:31 PM

How is it that every screen shot of the president makes him look like an arrogant prig? Lucky timing I guess.

Cindy Munford on June 1, 2009 at 6:31 PM

‘PRESENT’!

canopfor on June 1, 2009 at 6:33 PM

The “Failed to provide critical documents” line “shines out like a shaft of gold when all around is dark.”

shick on June 1, 2009 at 6:33 PM

In the Obamaverse, though, that’s an easy case: Who’s weaker, the Treasury Department or people living below the poverty line?

With boy-genius Geithner running Treasury, not sure that’s such an easy call. “Poor” people in this country have lots of stuff; Treasury . . . not so much.

AZCoyote on June 1, 2009 at 6:34 PM

Roberts and Alito were foolish white men without a wealth of experience. They should have spent some time wearing dresses and playing in a Mariachi band; then maybe The Zero would have found them qualified for SCOTUS.

Cicero43 on June 1, 2009 at 6:35 PM

At least he didn’t vote present this time.

His argument is surprise, class warfare.

shick on June 1, 2009 at 6:37 PM

How is it that every screen shot of the president makes him look like an arrogant prig?

Cindy Munford on June 1, 2009 at 6:31 PM

It is what it is.

tru2tx on June 1, 2009 at 6:38 PM

You know……….

…………. if I was Michael Steele, I might be using Obama’a own words against him, more often than not.

Just sayin’………

Seven Percent Solution on June 1, 2009 at 6:41 PM

Ummm,in the first video,is Obama campaigning!

canopfor on June 1, 2009 at 6:42 PM

All the Republican Senators (and the more conservative Dims) should vote against Sotomayor’s confirmation, and they should explain that they’re applying the “Senator Obama Standard” — any nominee, no matter how well-qualified, gets a no vote if you disagree with his/her judicial philosophy.

If it was good enough for Senator Obama then, it should be good enough for every other Senator now.

AZCoyote on June 1, 2009 at 6:42 PM

Just sayin’…..

Seven Percent Solution on June 1,2009 at 6:41PM.

Seven Percent Solution:

Thats a brilliant idea!

Use the Liberals own words against them,with a sprinkle
of ridecule!:)

canopfor on June 1, 2009 at 6:45 PM

Worry not, obama has a (D) next to his name, which makes him immune to criticism and hypocrisies , he is always right. Now… if you have the (R)… well your F^%&$ed

Donut on June 1, 2009 at 6:45 PM

Ummm,in the first video,is Obama campaigning!

canopfor on June 1, 2009 at 6:42 PM

Well, that would then mean it is Obama being President… What’s the difference?

Upstater85 on June 1, 2009 at 6:46 PM

In other words, he doesn’t want judges who’ll reason from principles to arrive at an outcome; he wants them to arrive at the outcome first, wherever possible, and then reason backwards to justify the decision.

Didn’t Obarfy apply the same logic to his stance on Gitmo?

How’d that work out for him?

President Dunderhead.

fogw on June 1, 2009 at 6:46 PM

Barack Obama’s gift to the GOP!

TN Mom on June 1, 2009 at 6:52 PM

Funny how Obama wanted to vote for Roberts, but his staff was able to change his mind. Not much of a decider.

Speedwagon82 on June 1, 2009 at 6:52 PM

I am so weary of his voice and rhythm of speaking.

keebs on June 1, 2009 at 6:54 PM

Funny how Obama wanted to vote for Roberts, but his staff was able to change his mind. Not much of a decider.

Speedwagon82 on June 1, 2009 at 6:52 PM

Well, he did manage to decide who was going to be on his staff. I wonder if he decided to wipe today. /sarc

Upstater85 on June 1, 2009 at 6:54 PM

Welcome citizens to the brave new world of Obama. Not only will Der Fuhrer dispense economic ‘fairness’, watch closely as he pulls judicial ‘fairness’ out of his ass.

GarandFan on June 1, 2009 at 6:55 PM

My question is:
Did he somehow sneak in a teleprompter to be able to address his fellow idiots in the senate?

HornetSting on June 1, 2009 at 6:56 PM

Welcome citizens to the brave new world of Obama. Not only will Der Fuhrer dispense economic ‘fairness’, watch closely as he pulls judicial ‘fairness’ out of his ass.

GarandFan on June 1, 2009 at 6:55 PM

What would you expect from an American Liberal?

I’m just waiting for him to pull a 4th of July celebration out of his…

Upstater85 on June 1, 2009 at 6:57 PM

Not only is that antithetical to the concept of a rule of law, it reduces complex questions involving competing values to moronic binary calculations about “the strong versus the weak.”

Well, Obama is the law now…constitution matters only as long as the people in power uphold it. With nobody to question what he is doing, he’s the king.

AUINSC on June 1, 2009 at 6:57 PM

One or both of the pardoned Black Panthers will fill Soto’s appellate seat.

THE CHOSEN ONE on June 1, 2009 at 6:59 PM

My question is:
Did he somehow sneak in a teleprompter to be able to address his fellow idiots in the senate?

HornetSting on June 1, 2009 at 6:56 PM

I’m sure they could have lent him theirs.

Bawney probably has one that comes with gay porn

Nancy has one that mimics the “mirror, mirror on the wall.”

Oh… but they aren’t in the Senate… I can’t think of a corrupt teleprompter-need’n congressman… /s

Upstater85 on June 1, 2009 at 7:00 PM

Whats the difference?

Upstater85 on June 1,2009 at 6:46PM.

Upstater85:The difference,good point,there is none!

Obama’s been acting for some time now,I
think!:)

canopfor on June 1, 2009 at 7:01 PM

Kinda OT, but I just wanted to let you all know, we aren’t the only racists in the world…

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8076526.stm

Upstater85 on June 1, 2009 at 7:02 PM

Upstater85:The difference,good point,there is none!

Obama’s been acting for some time now,I
think!:)

canopfor on June 1, 2009 at 7:01 PM

I don’t even know if he completely knows the truth. There are certain things he definitely knows that he is corrupting, but the rest probably comes naturally. His mother and him probably acted out some scenes when he was a child…

I can only imagine which rallies she went to (with her son).

Coat hangers come to mind.

Upstater85 on June 1, 2009 at 7:04 PM

I’m just waiting for him to pull a 4th of July celebration out of his…

Upstater85 on June 1, 2009 at 6:57 PM

You’ve just sunk me further into despair… My favorite holiday is going to be marred by Obama being president and trying to talk about the Declaration.

myrenovations on June 1, 2009 at 7:05 PM

…the Roberts clip gives you a better feel for just how stupid and dishonest his litmus test is.

That about covers Obama’s bio, stupid and dishonest.

Zorro on June 1, 2009 at 7:09 PM

Stupid, dishonest, and inept.

n0doz on June 1, 2009 at 7:10 PM

Coat hangers come to mind.

Upstater85 on June 1,2009 at 7:04PM.

Upstater85:Add to the coat hanger rallies,Death to Israel,
and probably,an Anti-War Vietnam Rally as well!:)_

canopfor on June 1, 2009 at 7:11 PM

You’ve just sunk me further into despair… My favorite holiday is going to be marred by Obama being president and trying to talk about the Declaration.

myrenovations on June 1, 2009 at 7:05 PM

Oh, come on, all of us Right Wing Extremists can buy our fireworks (legal or not) and point them to DC simultaneously…

Fortunately for the Governing Class, Scare Force One will be flying over every city in America at that very moment and will be able to magically deflect the extremely dangerous explosives… The next day, fire will be made illegal.

Upstater85 on June 1, 2009 at 7:12 PM

I got through half of the first video before I had to stop. I am sick to death of hearing, and seeing this man. All he does is drone on and on. His style of speech is also very annoying. He swallows the ends of his words. What is he trying to sound like when he does that? Ugh.

UnEasyRider on June 1, 2009 at 7:13 PM

Coat hangers come to mind.

Upstater85 on June 1,2009 at 7:04PM.

Upstater85:Add to the coat hanger rallies,Death to Israel,
and probably,an Anti-War Vietnam Rally as well!:)_

canopfor on June 1, 2009 at 7:11 PM

I think you can scratch the Vietnam Rally… The Kennedy’s wouldn’t want to smear the name of their legendary war mongering brother…

Upstater85 on June 1, 2009 at 7:14 PM

You’re just finding out now that Obama is a hypocrite?

MaiDee on June 1, 2009 at 7:15 PM

I am so weary of his voice and rhythm of speaking.

keebs on June 1, 2009 at 6:54 PM

+100. He seems to think he’s a 21st-century Martin Luther King. Now, King was inspiring. And his words actually meant something.

BuckeyeSam on June 1, 2009 at 7:22 PM

+100. He seems to think he’s a 21st-century Martin Luther King. Now, King was inspiring. And his words actually meant something.

BuckeyeSam on June 1, 2009 at 7:22 PM

So in reality, he’s more like the 21st century’s version of Carter and one of the Kennedys’ spawn.

Upstater85 on June 1, 2009 at 7:26 PM

What a long-winded, self-promoting little sh*t. No wonder the Dems couldn’t wait to run him for prez.

disa on June 1, 2009 at 7:38 PM

Not only is that antithetical to the concept of a rule of law

So’s throwing out the bankruptcy laws. This is rule of Dear Leader, not rule of law.

rbj on June 1, 2009 at 7:53 PM

Only 40 comments . I suspect this is one of those posts that has most going –no duh–.

CWforFreedom on June 1, 2009 at 8:07 PM

OBAMA PRAISED ROBERTS’ IMPARTIALITY.

SOMETHING SOTOMAYOR HAS SAID SHE DOESN’T HAVE.

reliapundit on June 1, 2009 at 8:41 PM

I don’t know, after Obama’s in office for three years, the unwed mother on welfare may have more financial integrity and stronger finances that the US Treasury Department.

eaglewingz08 on June 1, 2009 at 9:07 PM

For example, as liberal as it was, even the Warren Court never went so far as to declare a constitutional right to welfare, no doubt realizing how crippling that sort of entitlement would be to future Congresses notwithstanding its sympathy for the poor.

The Warren Court came really close to doing this exact thing. One of my law professors was a clerk for Harlan, who used to complain that during a stretch of the Warren Court, five justices used to caucus separately.

As for Obama, nothing he says can be used against him in a court of law or anywhere else. He’s read us all our “Obama” rights.

Attila (Pillage Idiot) on June 1, 2009 at 10:18 PM

not going to happen, none but a few will ever see it or discern the info enough to get it. WHO will point it out? I pray for my Senator Sessions who is about to get gripped in the bite of….

seesalrun on June 1, 2009 at 10:54 PM

MSM is dead here comes your Internet Czar. God I hate that term. It’s Russian and Communist.

seesalrun on June 1, 2009 at 10:55 PM

I feel like I’m trapped in an old “Twilight Zone” episode!

Star20 on June 1, 2009 at 11:17 PM

Net intellectul content: ZERO

drunyan8315 on June 1, 2009 at 11:47 PM

What a clown.
His first word: “uh…”
He reads his entire, laborious, trite statement from notes, not yet having TOTUS to lead him around by his ear.
His first blathering statement is to thank two of the biggest horse’s asses in the Senate for blah, blah, blah.

His conclusion is that Scalia and Ginsburg must surely agree 95% of the time, and that in the other 5 cases the law is meaningless, and subordinate to “what I like”.

He blathers about his “law school experience” and claims that he “argued cases at the Appellate Court”. I call Bullshit on that. He never practiced law above the grifter level, so what would he have been doing at an Appellate Court?

Jaibones on June 2, 2009 at 12:49 AM

I’ve got news for this Obamanation of Desolation. This is what God says of Israel:

I will make you a great nation;
I will bless you
And make your name great;
And you shall be a blessing.

I will bless those who bless you,
And I will curse him who curses you

Daggett on June 2, 2009 at 7:40 AM