Obama: I sure hope the Supreme Court doesn’t do something unprecedented by striking down ObamaCare
posted at 4:30 pm on April 2, 2012 by Allahpundit
Via the Examiner. In what way would it be an “unprecedented, extraordinary step,” as he claims here? They’ve struck down laws before for violating the Commerce Clause — not often, admittedly, but it’s happened in not one but two landmark cases over the last 20 years. If there’s anything novel about the ObamaCare case, it’s the idea of federal power to compel purchases, not the Court’s reaction to it. And what on earth does this mean?
“Ultimately I am confident that the Supreme Court will not take what would be an unprecedented extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress,” Obama told reporters today while speaking with Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Mexican President Felipe Calderon.
Obama reminded reporters that conservative commentators, have complained about “judicial activism or a lack of judicial restraint,” that “an unelected group of people would somehow overturn a duly constituted and passed law.”
The “strong majority” in Congress went 219-212 in the House, with 34 Democrats defecting. Not a single Republican in either chamber voted for it, and as Ace notes, the public itself has been steadfastly opposed to the law since day one. Against that backdrop, it’s an amazing show of balls by The One to dress this up as the Court somehow thwarting the people’s will. But even if O-Care really did have a “strong majority,” so what? The whole point of judicial review is to make sure that congressional majorities, strong or not, remain bound by their enumerated powers and the Bill of Rights. You know what law really did have a “strong majority” in both chambers? DOMA. Think there’ll be any tears shed on the left for majoritarianism if Anthony Kennedy cashiers that one on a 5-4 vote?
Don’t take this too seriously, though. This is just Obama laying the narrative groundwork for the benefit of all the non-lawyers watching at home who don’t know enough to fact check him. He wants to plant the idea that striking down the mandate would be the most unique, extraordinary, sensational, unbelievable, unprecedented decision in Supreme Court history evah so that, if it does happen, people will regard it as illegitimate and that’ll hopefully rally them to turn out in the fall. It’s a stump speech, in other words. Just a little more dishonest than usual.
Update: Such is O’s respect for strong congressional majorities that his own DOJ won’t even defend DOMA in court anymore. Thanks to Dan McLaughlin for reminding me of that.
Related Posts:
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
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »
They don’t care. They have an actual etch-a-sketch in the MSM which will add it to the liberal, “America has become Ungovernable” narrative: now the courts are messed up.
They will keep beating this horse until they stand in a puddle of glue. They will win at all costs. There isn’t a fact that they are not willing to skip, not a concept that they are not willing to twist, not a story that they are not willing to downplay, no history they won’t excerpt, and no ambiguity they won’t prosecute…
If you say “Judicial activism is bad”, then they’ll find some way that a decision you like is “activism”. If you don’t like “government overreach” they will find some case that you sided with “government overreach”.
Here’s where our RINO friends aren’t that helpful. Because if they like the goal as much as liberals do, they’ll use the same arguments.
Axeman on April 2, 2012 at 5:46 PM
People, get a grip. At best the mandate will fall 5-4, and I am not certain they have the votes to overturn the entire law (which is much less important). Without the mandate, the law falls on its own.
The 4 liberal justices will NEVER vote against the mandate. Hell, they were coaching Verrilli from the bench!
The 5-4 decision also makes Obama’s demagoguery against the Court all the more valuable, since the 3 women will have voted with Obama.
In the end, he can tear the Court apart all he wants, but he’ll lose as many or more votes than he gains. People are not going to want to see the entire judiciary slammed by a POTUS.
matthew8787 on April 2, 2012 at 5:48 PM
Really? Obama is going to chastise the court prior to their ruling? He really isn’t that a bright diplomat or politician is he.
Koa on April 2, 2012 at 5:53 PM
It seems more and more likely that he does. I read his remarks earlier, but I just watched the video. Study his delivery. It’s flat. All the air has been let out of him.
dogsoldier on April 2, 2012 at 5:55 PM
If the supreme court strikes down Obamacare, then Romneycare by right should be struck down if not for it being a state law.
Think about this, if obamacare is struck down, romneycare running kills that issue in the general election. His HC mandates are the same as obamasatan.
Vote anybody but romneycare, prevent him from getting the needed delegates. Make it go to the convention so we can get a real conservative. Strategically vote, let’s not have to wait another 4 years for a conservative candidate. In 2016, the liberal GOP establishment might do the same thing and put up a squish like Jeb bush.
Repeal romneycare now, vote anybody but him!!!
Danielvito on April 2, 2012 at 5:57 PM
Critical Race Theory and other psuedo-legal claptrap. My cat has a better understanding of Constitutional law.
RobertE on April 2, 2012 at 6:00 PM
Barry’s rant was comprised of convoluted logic, incoherently communicated.
FireBlogger on April 2, 2012 at 6:00 PM
For some one who is supposed to be a Professor of teaching the Constitution, cough cough, he doesn’t know squat about the Constitution.
mixplix on April 2, 2012 at 6:03 PM
Especially ObaMao, huh. Troll.
cicerone on April 2, 2012 at 6:07 PM
And I am confident that at least a few members of the Supreme Court will bear in mind that the entire debacle was passed by DEMOCRATS without any Republican support.
I fail to see how Obama’s argument regarding a “democratically elected Congress” holds water when the entire minority was locked out of the process and the thing only passed by using dirty tricks in accounting and procedures.
Murf76 on April 2, 2012 at 6:08 PM
If only they had deemed it passed it wouldn’t have even made it to the Court!!!!!
SouthernGent on April 2, 2012 at 6:09 PM
You lie.
it was written by a crew of unelected people and voted on, unread, by your weak majority, holmes……
ted c on April 2, 2012 at 6:10 PM
HHS’s Sebelius is determined to tie Obamacare into a rights for minorities’ issue.
http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2012pres/04/20120402c.html
onlineanalyst on April 2, 2012 at 6:10 PM
this is a community organizing speech.
weak sauce, weak sauce indeed…
ted c on April 2, 2012 at 6:13 PM
What’s unprecedented is this President’s behavior regarding the Supreme Court. First, the attack during the State of the Union Address,2-years ago, and now this. Attacking the Supreme Court about a decision to be rendered come this June! Is he crazy brilliant, or just playing Chicago-Style politics? I think the answer can’t be the former!
tomshup on April 2, 2012 at 6:14 PM
- libtard4goodfeelingsandbadoutcomes
peski on April 2, 2012 at 6:15 PM
Obamaturism of the Year. God help us
ifwhen he does something worse.redmama on April 2, 2012 at 6:21 PM
Freudian slip by Obama? “we are confident this will be over…” ummm “we are con…”
bbordwell on April 2, 2012 at 6:27 PM
The belief that he can rile up the less informed masses with this kind of lying is insulting at best, and seditious at worst.
mintycrys on April 2, 2012 at 6:29 PM
and they are trying to get Kennedy or maybe Breyer to switch votes in the next
70 days ….
conservative tarheel on April 2, 2012 at 6:31 PM
I just said the exact same to the Big Scot! It is the only job that Obama-lama-ding-dong has ever held, and he was kicked out of Chicago after less than three years. He is doing what he does best–pointing his bony, accusatory finger at the perceived enemy; even though said enemy is a co-equal branch of OUR government.
Loser. (O-l-d-d, not you, Ted C!)
ABO2012
herm2416 on April 2, 2012 at 6:31 PM
Step 1. Throw Obamacare out!!!
Step 2. Throw out Obama!!!
Step 3. Chant “Na Na Hey Hey Goodbye” like the brain dead Obots did to George Bush at the 2009 inauguration during the 2013 inauguration of ANY Republican President.
Sincerely,
A Repentant 40 year Democrat who will NEVER EVER(!!!) vote for a DemocRAT ever again!!!(But God Bless Scoop Jackson!)
wtng2fish on April 2, 2012 at 6:32 PM
This guy actually claims to have taught “constitutional law”?!!!
He has it all backwards. Last time I checked it was the Court’s role to determine what was or was not constitutional, not Congress.
Now I feel sorry for his students. I suspect they did not pass that part of the bar exam.
EdmundBurke247 on April 2, 2012 at 6:36 PM
Problem is, he always sounds like that..except when he’s talking about himself…then he’s so excited, I swear he’s about to light up a smoke after he’s done.
BlaxPac on April 2, 2012 at 6:39 PM
Good Lord. Does Obama think the Justices are really that stupid?
How does a president publicly tell bald-faced lies like this, (thus implying that the Supreme Court Justices can’t read, and don’t understand what transpired to force a very unpopular law into the books) and then expect the Justices to um… I guess, just not notice or something? How stupid does he think they are? or, we are?
Harbingeing on April 2, 2012 at 6:39 PM
Let me quote Joe Wilson:
YOU LIE!
ProfShadow on April 2, 2012 at 6:42 PM
So Obama, are you telling me that if the Patriot Act – which was passed almost unanimously – contained provisions that were well and beyond what they actually are, they could not be unconstitutional merely because Congress passed them?
Did this guy actually go to law school? He seems to be evoking a new understanding of constitutional law whereby every law passed by a democratically elected Congress is constitutional, as long as it has support of a “strong majority”, meaning in this case the slimmest possible majority necessary to pass in the Senate.
Really, Obama? I am flabbergasted by the sheer stupidity of this statement.
Seixon on April 2, 2012 at 6:43 PM
DOMA will be struck down with more than 5-4. Roberts might cross on that one.
Critic2029 on April 2, 2012 at 6:45 PM
Who was the idiot “reporter” that asked a partisan question about Obamacare, instead of anything that had to do with our relations with Canada and Mexico?
Not only was the question stupid, it was disrespectful to Stephen Harper and Felipe Calderon, and brown nosing to Obama.
Seabecker on April 2, 2012 at 6:47 PM
Shakedown … Chicago style.
bw222 on April 2, 2012 at 6:47 PM
Should I not be reading this as a good sign? SCOTUS has already had their preliminary vote. Two of the justices were hand picked by Obama, and I think there’s a great chance one or both of them funneled some information back to him or one of his top advisers. And, today, he’s out railing against how “unprecedented” it would be if overturned. Starting to sound like Kennedy did the right thing.
The Count on April 2, 2012 at 6:48 PM
Actually, when you back out the number of senators that were “Appointed” by governors, then the strong majority of “Elected” disappears.
Robert Jensen on April 2, 2012 at 6:50 PM
Good lord, what does this fool thing the supreme court is there for? or why they are NOT elected officials but hold the position for life (or as long as they want). Its quite obvious he needs a refresher course in civics, specifically the checks and balances portion regarding the three branches of government.
Koa on April 2, 2012 at 6:50 PM
You KNOW one of the SCOTUS liberals gave Obama a heads up on where this is going. h/t BlueGrassPundit
Roy Rogers on April 2, 2012 at 6:51 PM
doubling down on bashing scotus…go ahead champ, that worked out so well before….
idiot
cmsinaz on April 2, 2012 at 6:52 PM
OBAMA SUPPORTS SLAVERY!
Which was once the law of the land, too, Obozo.
profitsbeard on April 2, 2012 at 6:53 PM
It simply boils down to Congress confronting a problem and solving it. For the Judicial to find fault with this they better have some high falutin ideas to back it up. Otherwise it’s extreme partisanism.
richardporter on April 2, 2012 at 6:55 PM
Funny I was hoping just the opposite. Do your job court. Strike it down!
Bmore on April 2, 2012 at 6:59 PM
You mean you don’t want an unelected group of people to overturn a duly constituted and passed law which facilitates an unelected group of people to micromanage our healthcare system.
Got it.
This effin guy is unreal.
BTW – WTF is a “duly constituted and passed law”?
CycloneCDB on April 2, 2012 at 6:59 PM
Barky’s a despicable, lying scumbag with a pea-brain who hates this nation and everything about it. Big surprise. This has been obvious since the 2008 primary. The guy holds our nation and our institutions in nothe=ing but contempt and loves to just make up the most ridiculous sh#t. He loves to antagonize America … when he’s not trying to intimidate us.
Barky is doing nothing different, here, than he’s been doing continuously for years, already. He’s a walking Constitutional violation. Literally.
ThePrimordialOrderedPair on April 2, 2012 at 7:00 PM
Watch the video of him talking about banning drilling. He’s very animated and happy during that performance. I see your point, he is often matter of fact, but he seemed even flatter than usual in this video. He did not stand straight and his speech was halting, hesitant.
dogsoldier on April 2, 2012 at 7:04 PM
I told you…
… get ready for the “War on the Justices“.
More fuel to the fire this Summer…
… and another excuse for martial law.
It’s for the good of the Country…
/
Seven Percent Solution on April 2, 2012 at 7:05 PM
Like striking down abortion laws in all 50 states?
JellyToast on April 2, 2012 at 7:07 PM
“Unprecedented”????
No wonder Gates complained about having to give history lessons to Obama and his cabinet when trying to explain his positions and recommendations.
SCOTUS struck down FDR’s NRA as unconstitutional, which was at the time a very BFD.
farsighted on April 2, 2012 at 7:08 PM
This should come as no surprise because “Horse Face” is a ruthless and unethical as Obama.
Ohioans of the early 1970s were far more astute than Kansans of the early 21st century as they threw her dad (John Gilligan) out after one term as governor.
bw222 on April 2, 2012 at 7:09 PM
indeed
cmsinaz on April 2, 2012 at 7:09 PM
As far as I know-correct me if i’m wrong-the Supreme Court has never been elected and their job is too rule on the constitutionality of laws.
Obama must be going nuts
gerrym51 on April 2, 2012 at 7:12 PM
Was there a teleprompter missing or under subpoena? lol
BlaxPac on April 2, 2012 at 7:13 PM
Obama and the Dems are in my view telegraphing that will not accept/abide by any SCOTUS decision that doesnt go their way.
first over the weekend you had Begala and Carville doing their Demonize-the-Conservative tag team act that was moldy and predictable 20 years ago: whatever the issue, characterize Republican/conservative people and viewpoints in terms so dehumanizing and over-the-top offensive as to make ackowledgement of their very existence a hate crime. Its what these guys do best. In fact its pretty much all they do.
Now you have the President himself straight up saying “Uh uh…aint nobody overturning nothing,” with his trademark smugness and condescension, practically daring the court to rule against The God King Obama.
If Obamacare is tossed in whole or part, Dems/Obama/MSM will shrug and say “well these judges are all spooky conservative haters controlled by darth cheney who stole 2000 from us, so we’re not bound by any decision of that court we dont ‘feel’ helps the fundamental transformation of the United States.”
Sacramento on April 2, 2012 at 7:14 PM
Drudge just posted the 64k question. “Did he get a leak?”
dogsoldier on April 2, 2012 at 7:14 PM
Kagan has already told him that Obamacare has been rejected by the supremes. He’s attacking now in anticipation of the verdict in June. God help us get rid of this communist, muslim piece of…
Kaffa on April 2, 2012 at 7:14 PM
I think Bader-Meinhoff Ginsburg will retire after this election. Her health is deteriorating and I think she held on for this case.
If Obamacare is struck down, she’ll retire immediately.
ardenenoch on April 2, 2012 at 7:15 PM
OT, sorry to sound like a computer illiterate (which I am), but how do you get quotes from previous comments to show up in that grey box? I always just click on “strong” or “emphasis”. I tried “close tags”, but
that didn’t work. Thanks for any help you can give me.
ardenenoch on April 2, 2012 at 7:18 PM
Its unprecedented to strike down one of HIS laws.
I have to think that this guy can’t be that stupid.
Now, if he were a Narcisist, then maybe I could see him making comments like that. Guess your bullying tactics don’t work on the court, eh Mister President?
Wonder what will happen next?
Unexplained death, bomb, assassination?
If I were a Justice, I’d be wearing bulletproof robes and have my clerks starting my car.
gordo on April 2, 2012 at 7:18 PM
one of the morning joe regulars even thinks this is a bad idea….
cmsinaz on April 2, 2012 at 7:19 PM
Outrage upon outrage. But possibly a good sign actually. One or the other of his pinhead nominees must have leaked the vote. This kind of outright bullying reeks of desperation. And it could backfire. Supreme Court Justices pushed around by a nobody street flunky? C’mon.
curved space on April 2, 2012 at 7:20 PM
ardenenoch on April 2, 2012 at 7:18 PM
cmsinaz on April 2, 2012 at 7:20 PM
select quote button, copy the poster you like then select the quote button again….voila
cmsinaz on April 2, 2012 at 7:21 PM
The Constitutional Law Scholar showinghis “smrt”s
Cleombrotus on April 2, 2012 at 7:22 PM
Scalia is a THUG on the bench. I can’t even begin to say how much of a disaster Verilli has been.
0bamaderangementsyndrom on April 2, 2012 at 7:23 PM
Strike it down.
We got your back.
Saltysam on April 2, 2012 at 7:25 PM
FIFY
profitsbeard on April 2, 2012 at 7:26 PM
What? Scalia is moonlighting as a gangsta rapper?
Say it ain’t so!
BlaxPac on April 2, 2012 at 7:27 PM
Is Obama stupid enough to think he can intimidate SCOTUS or does he know they will decide against him and he’s therefore started the political campaign against them? It’s hard to say. He did manage to intimidate almost an entire nation into not demanding his birth certificate even though war hero Dwight Eisenhower produced his without fanfare.
One thing is clear. Obama is a thug. He should be pictured in a hoodie until voted out of office.
Basilsbest on April 2, 2012 at 7:29 PM
I think Obama is right.
1 Socialized medicine is unprecedented in America.
2 Forcing people to buy it (individual mandate) is unprecedented.
3 The level of corruption, chicanery and backroom deals to get this legislation through congress is unprec4edented.
4 The level of bureaucratic fat included thousands of overpaid, underworked and pompous popinjays to administer the program will also be unprecedented.
5 The unprecedented cost overruns in this piece off garbage will exceed 15-20 times the highest estimates and make Boston’s “Big Dig” look economical by comparison.
6 The downgrading of America’s medical care to near the top of the ladder to that resembling Zimbabwe-will, too, be unprecedented.
SO WHY SHOULDN’T OVERTURNING IT BE UNPRECEDENTED?
MaiDee on April 2, 2012 at 7:31 PM
Americans are looking at this freak and asking themselves:
“Gee… when was the last time I took a bit of advice from Howdy Doodie”.
/And the WH knows it.
Key West Reader on April 2, 2012 at 7:34 PM
One of Axelrod’s elves calling Scalia a thug ? Pfffft. Delusional Liberal. Over the deranged Lefty elf’s head.
Buzzy Ginsburg may be an ACLU hack and enjoying her filthy lucre like the Clintoons but I get the impression that overall she doesn’t seek to destroy the country like Zero does and may try to hang on until O-blamer is gone. Buzzy may want power over the peons as a good little Marxist but maybe, maybe she can realize that Cambodia is not her desired outcome?
There is little doubt that perjurer/ freak Kagan let boss know that someone (likely Kennedy) decided against therefore next on the agenda likely will be Chicago Way intimidation of Justices vulnerable to protection-racket hints… if ya know what-ahm sayin’…
viking01 on April 2, 2012 at 7:35 PM
Don’t blame it on, Verilli. You can’t argue what can’t be argued.
This is what happens when an entire movement never has to explain itself in the upside-down propaganda world of the arts-entertainment-news-government-establishment-media complex. Suddenly, when faced with serious questions in an arena where you are required to forcefully argue a rational point the “Duhhhh” just bubbles up. It’s only logical.
Saltysam on April 2, 2012 at 7:35 PM
There’s no way any of the supremes leaked it. Even they know that they must keep some form of integrity in the process. I may sound naive but i dont believe in conspiracies. I may not like these liberal flunkies but they would lose all sense of power by getting involved in that kind of stuff. We still need to sweat this thing out. I acually believe it wont be dumped because conservatives are easily intimidated.
Robb on April 2, 2012 at 7:39 PM
THANKS!
ardenenoch on April 2, 2012 at 7:40 PM
My hope is that Obama framing the debate this way means he is concerned that the law might actually be tossed out by the Supreme Court.
BryanS on April 2, 2012 at 7:41 PM
Yeah! Didn’t anyone check his resume and vet this guy before giving him such an important assignment? Clearly he was over his head. There must have been dozens of better qualified candidates. Who appointed this guy?
farsighted on April 2, 2012 at 7:41 PM
As many of us predicted, either Kagan or the “wise” Latina have tipped Barry off to the initial vote and it’s for KILLING Obamacare.
Barry ALWAYS resorts to thuggery and threats when he even has a HINT that the word “NO” is coming his way.
wildcat72 on April 2, 2012 at 7:44 PM
They could have resurrected Clarence Darrow and he’d have sounded stupid defending Obamacare.
There is no defense for the indefensible.
wildcat72 on April 2, 2012 at 7:45 PM
Obama Rally Signs Circa 2012:
This is what stupidity looks like.
Key West Reader on April 2, 2012 at 7:45 PM
After the Kelo (and Roe) decisions there is no integrity in the process.
Kagan is a childish oddity and representative (also see the wide Latina) of the infection festering at Harvard Law. She willingly testified she had no conflict of interest whilst obfuscating her active support of Obamacare before nomination explicitly for boss Zero’s benefit.
viking01 on April 2, 2012 at 7:46 PM
I think it will be at least 6-3 against the whole law (some against the mandate and some against the Medicaid expansion) with 5-4 for not severing it. Breyer seemed very irritated with Verrilli on the Medicaid expansion and Ginsberg was unusually quiet. They granted an extra 15 minutes per side to argue the case because the justices were very interested and had more questions. This on the part of the appeal that Everyone said shouldn’t even have been considered. 26 states opposing a law is very unusual.
txmomof6 on April 2, 2012 at 7:46 PM
The man was inarticulate, showed no confidence, authority or command of the court room. There is a bit of showmanship that is required to be an effective lawyer, with a little charisma and bravado and these are all the things that Verilli lack. It’s all in the sell, this law is not anything unprecedented, several conservative judges have upheld it.
0bamaderangementsyndrom on April 2, 2012 at 7:47 PM
He’s lashed out and intimidated SCOTUS before. Remember the SOTU a year back where he lashed out at them for the Citizens United decision?
wildcat72 on April 2, 2012 at 7:48 PM
Um… HELLO! This is Obama. O-BAM-A. Nobody says no to Obama, it is why he coasted through public office after public office without actually having to have a record.
Obamacare was a law forced through by brute force and bribery. Nancy Pelosi’s demand that you have to pass the bill to see it is the reason I refuse to call it by its more PC name. There was no strong majority that passed it. That was what was unprecedented, not anything that comes out of the SCOTUS.
Happy Nomad on April 2, 2012 at 7:48 PM
I was just wondering how long it would be before bloggers start speculating about this. Lots of people are making comments about potential leaks, but as of yet, neither Ed, Allah, or Tina have brought this up. Neither has Glenn Reynolds at Instapundit, Erick Erickson at Red State, or anyone at Powerline. Glad Drudge is speculating about this.
ardenenoch on April 2, 2012 at 7:48 PM
Damn that third branch of government!
BacaDog on April 2, 2012 at 7:50 PM
That’s why I believe Kagan is the leaker.
She was nominated SPECIFICALLY to uphold Obamacare. She was involved intimately in it.
And she needs to be IMPEACHED as unfit and unqualified to be a justice.
wildcat72 on April 2, 2012 at 7:50 PM
what a punk this president is..tries to bully everybody but we are done with this crap and not going to take it anymore! *turns on some twisted sister* http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4xmckWVPRaI&ob=av2e
sadsushi on April 2, 2012 at 7:51 PM
“Shame about that Supreme Court you old White Guys set up to avoid subversive forces like me circa 2012. Shame if ya lose that Usurpeme Court if you don’t go my way”.
This is why Barack Hussein Obama will only serve one term.
This is why America needs to take a good hard look at why Herman Cain was ‘eliminated’ by Hollywood at the hands of .. gack. Gloria Allred.
Key West Reader on April 2, 2012 at 7:52 PM
I hope Samuel “Not true” Alito is writing the majority opinion.
monalisa on April 2, 2012 at 7:53 PM
Anyone know why it will take over two months for the ruling to come out? What’s the usual timeframe?
Lord of the Wings on April 2, 2012 at 7:54 PM
I think that it is unquestionable at this point that Barry got a leak, and that it is that Obamacare, both mandate and in toto is DEAD. Else he wouldn’t be lashing out like he has today.
He is attempting to bully Kennedy and other justices with not so veiled threats.
If he knew he was winning he wouldn’t DO such a thing which will PISS OFF the justices (it should piss off even the liberals). It’s a lot of risk for too little return.
After Little Bammy’s temper tantrum I’d say that Kennedy will be even more resolved. 5-4 to strike the whole thing is a given now. Our Emperor’s rant is meant for the mob not the justices.
wildcat72 on April 2, 2012 at 7:54 PM
Unprecedented and extraordinary in the sense that it will be a first for Obama to have to deal with a politically disastrous blow. He knows it’s coming. He needs to spin the straw into gold, and this is just the start.
lynncgb on April 2, 2012 at 7:57 PM
Actually, I think it was two years ago in 2010.
Obama said:
“Last week, the Supreme Court reversed a century of law to open the floodgates for special interests — including foreign corporations — to spend without limit in our elections. Well I don’t think American elections should be bankrolled by America’s most powerful interests, or worse, by foreign entities. They should be decided by the American people, and that’s why I’m urging Democrats and Republicans to pass a bill that helps to right this wrong.”
That was then, this is now. In 2012, Obama is being bankrolled by anybody who will give the rat bastard traitor and commie lover money including today’s story about yet another bundler guilty of fruad.
Happy Nomad on April 2, 2012 at 7:58 PM
It actually takes longer than 2 months most times. Especially for something this big. The Supremes are fast tracking this case. They usually take 6 months to release a ruling…
wildcat72 on April 2, 2012 at 7:58 PM
Wow, you’re really being hard on the President…oh wait.
Really, have you ever seen a SCOTUS proceeding? Why in in the name of the Holy Ghost (again, not talking about your candidate here) do you believe that its like a episode of “Matlock” or “Law and Order”?
But again, we’re at the point where those other Judges couldn’t have been that correct, because now 9 Judges are deciding, instead of 1 or 3.
BlaxPac on April 2, 2012 at 7:58 PM
That “unelected” group of people were all confirmed by the United States Congress.
Right. And since we don’t teach civics or US government in school anymore, there’s a pretty good chance that a sizable number of people don’t know that the SCOTUS is a co-equal branch of government.
Good thing we’re not Wisconsin or there would be a recall petition started.
BacaDog on April 2, 2012 at 8:01 PM
Unprecedented in the fact that Little Barry never got a spanking in his life. And he’s about to.
This doesn’t benefit him. It makes him look petty. It DEFINITELY is UNPRESIDENTIAL to rail at the Supreme Court as he has. I can remember only two others who did this, Andrew Jackson and FDR.
I really fail to see how he gets any traction out of the court striking what is a VERY UNPOPULAR LAW…
wildcat72 on April 2, 2012 at 8:01 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »