Guess who else admonished a Scotus decision?

[MaggieMae]

Should they have walked out on Reagan too?

Try to follow this. The three cited Presidents were advocating a position they would like the court to pursue. Obama was critical of an actual decision. I happen to agree with the President's position. The disagreement comes with when and where he chose to make the statement.

Well initially, the USSC was only charged with deciding on the dispute over whether the Clinton movie should be regulated as a campaign ad. But it decided to take on the whole ball of wax regarding corporate influence on elections in general, and basically took on an issue that should be decided by Congress. (You know, that other branch of government.) If existing restrictions on corporations still remained in any new campaign reform bill, only then could it be challenged by bringing the issue to the Supreme Court.

You're probably right that the time and place were wrong, but then this is a year of not doing things by following protocol. No elected legislator ever shouted out YOU LIE when a president was speaking before a joint session of Congress before either.

 

[MaggieMae]

Al Gore?

smart ass!

That case before the USSC was actually brought by Bush (Bush v. Gore). So there ya go.

 

[MaggieMae]

it was rude....he was sarcastic and rude several times in fact.....

No more Mr. Nice Guy, or haven't you gotten the memo yet.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The President played politics with the Supreme Court. He did it with all three branches of government present. It was out of line completely. The Justices should have quietly risen and left the speech.

The Supreme Court decision was purely along political lines. You can't talk about it without a political component.

I'm still astonished that the professed populist conservatives have generally decided they like the decision. Talk about politicizing something.

 

[MaggieMae]

Rude? Son, rude is that wonderful moment in Senate history when the presiding officer (the veep) told a senator to f-off. Yes, that was rude.

Actually the FU moment came when Obama was talking about the Senate blocking a bipartisan commission to study deficit reduction. He said he would ask that it be put back on the agenda, and if the Senate refused it again, he would do it by Executive Order.

 

[MaggieMae]

State of the Union: President Obama, Justice Alito and Political Theater - ABC News


Harding, Franklin D. Roosevelt and Reagan were the only three who really took aim at the Court specifically -- Harding to advocate the repeal of court decisions outlawing child labor in America (really); FDR to pressure the court to get out of the way of the New Deal; and Reagan to urge the passage of a constitutional amendment allowing school prayer.

Let's see, I remember Andrew Jackson and the Indian Removal Act. You're right, the SCOTUS has no enforcement powers, that's uh, the executive's job. Power to Jackson, he had his way with the Trail of Tears. By the 30's the people wouldn't allow the court packing plan, in fact FDR never had the overwhelming popularity that he'd enjoyed to that point.

You bet, I think Obama is fully capable of dismantling the court, if he could. Hell he'd do away with Congress too. Those other branches keep getting in his way.

You're beyond extremism, Annie. I think you're one step away from needing professional help.

For one thing, if anything, Obama hasn't been strong ENOUGH in influencing Congress. THEY have been calling the shots. Hello?

For another thing, the Supreme Court HAS become an activist body of secondary lawmakers. It is not charged with making law, which is what it did with this latest decision; they are charged with deciding whether EXISTING laws are constitutional or not, period. The justices are also not supposed to go off on pleasure trips with one party to pending USSC cases (Cheney and Scalia).

 

[JakeStarkey]

Oh, you are listening, manu, yes, you are, and, yes, you are responding.

No, BHO was not rude, but he did call our side out righteously.

Dude, you really gotta give up the "I'm a republican" charade....Nobody's buying it.

As if I am in the slightest concerned about what you believe, Dude. You are irrelevant to me. My concern is outing your nonsense in pretending that you are upholding Republican principles.

 

[Oddball]

Oh, you are listening, manu, yes, you are, and, yes, you are responding.

No, BHO was not rude, but he did call our side out righteously.

Dude, you really gotta give up the "I'm a republican" charade....Nobody's buying it.

As if I am in the slightest concerned about what you believe, Dude. You are irrelevant to me. My concern is outing your nonsense in pretending that you are upholding Republican principles.

Whatever, man.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

it was rude....he was sarcastic and rude several times in fact.....

No more Mr. Nice Guy, or haven't you gotten the memo yet.

are you talking about obama manu? I saw that a few times too. I decided to let it go.

Maggie its not very presidential to behave like that.

 

[Annie]

State of the Union: President Obama, Justice Alito and Political Theater - ABC News


Harding, Franklin D. Roosevelt and Reagan were the only three who really took aim at the Court specifically -- Harding to advocate the repeal of court decisions outlawing child labor in America (really); FDR to pressure the court to get out of the way of the New Deal; and Reagan to urge the passage of a constitutional amendment allowing school prayer.

Let's see, I remember Andrew Jackson and the Indian Removal Act. You're right, the SCOTUS has no enforcement powers, that's uh, the executive's job. Power to Jackson, he had his way with the Trail of Tears. By the 30's the people wouldn't allow the court packing plan, in fact FDR never had the overwhelming popularity that he'd enjoyed to that point.

You bet, I think Obama is fully capable of dismantling the court, if he could. Hell he'd do away with Congress too. Those other branches keep getting in his way.

You're beyond extremism, Annie. I think you're one step away from needing professional help.

For one thing, if anything, Obama hasn't been strong ENOUGH in influencing Congress. THEY have been calling the shots. Hello?

For another thing, the Supreme Court HAS become an activist body of secondary lawmakers. It is not charged with making law, which is what it did with this latest decision; they are charged with deciding whether EXISTING laws are constitutional or not, period. The justices are also not supposed to go off on pleasure trips with one party to pending USSC cases (Cheney and Scalia).

Sure I am. Seriously do believe he is the most dangerous president we've ever had. I take solace that it appears he is now a one year, lame duck.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Oh, you are listening, manu, yes, you are, and, yes, you are responding.

No, BHO was not rude, but he did call our side out righteously.

Dude, you really gotta give up the "I'm a republican" charade....Nobody's buying it.

I've known a good many NY Republicans and there is no reason to think Jake is lying.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The whack jobs on the lunatic fringe really are unhappy that they have realized they are on the way out of the party. Observing the GOP last night made the world realize that a break in the obstructionism unity is going to happen. Wonder who is coming to work the Dems? Not Mitch, I think, but . . . .

 

[P F Tinmore]

Like no one ragged on the SC for Roe v Wade or Kelo.

The SC is not above criticism. If they screw up they should hear about it.

 

[Avatar4321]

Please note that no one has quoted a single passage demonstrating that Obama is doing what other Presidents have done.

 

[TheSuaveOne]

For another thing, the Supreme Court HAS become an activist body of secondary lawmakers. It is not charged with making law, which is what it did with this latest decision; they are charged with deciding whether EXISTING laws are constitutional or not, period.

You really should read more. There was not activism in the ruling on this matter. They basically did their job. They found that it was unconstitutional to not allow corps or unions to use their first amendment rights which to date are presiedent. Remove corporate personage and you will have a case, until then, the court ruled properly, even if you disagree with its outcome.

-TSO

 

[TheSuaveOne]

Like no one ragged on the SC for Roe v Wade or Kelo.

The SC is not above criticism. If they screw up they should hear about it.

The difference is, it's not been done in front of the court in which the ruling was made. Yes president have disagreed with the court in a state of the union address, but not the specific justices that made the ruling. Big difference in my book.

-TSO

 

[Truthmatters]

Kinda like when they gave the election to Bush and then said the decision did not make precidence.

The whole reason they SCOTUS exsists is to make precidence

 

[TheSuaveOne]

Kinda like when they gave the election to Bush and then said the decision did not make precidence.

The whole reason they SCOTUS exsists is to make precidence

No they didn't...

In a per curiam decision, the Court in Bush v. Gore ruled that the Florida Supreme Court's method for recounting ballots was a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

-TSO

 

[JakeStarkey]

SCOTUS is not immune to public rebuke by any president. Good for BHO, bad to the SCOTUS majority. I have no doubt that the Dems would successfully impeach Alito and Scalia if they could pick up a few more seats in each chamber.

 

[Truthmatters]

Kinda like when they gave the election to Bush and then said the decision did not make precidence.

The whole reason they SCOTUS exsists is to make precidence

No they didn't...

In a per curiam decision, the Court in Bush v. Gore ruled that the Florida Supreme Court's method for recounting ballots was a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

-TSO

And then they added to the decision a caveot that it could not be applied ot other decisions.

The whole reason they take up an issue is to clarify the laws and make prescident