More blowback from Obama's Supreme Ct. threat

Discussion in 'Politics' started by SniperFire, Apr 5, 2012.

  1. SniperFire
    Offline

    SniperFire Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2012
    Messages:
    13,627
    Thanks Received:
    1,219
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Inside Your Head
    Ratings:
    +1,223
    'So earlier this week, the President did something that as far as I know is completely unprecedented: he not only tried to publicly pressure the Court into deciding a pending case in the way he wants it decided; he also questioned its very authority under the Constitution.'

    Now, the President’s words were particularly troubling given his past treatment of the Court. Two years ago, he used a State of the Union Address to publicly chastise the Court for its decision in another case he didn’t like — with members of the Court sitting just a few feet away.
    He looked at the line that wisely separates the three branches of government, and stepped right over it. But what the President did this week went even farther. With his words, he was no longer trying to embarrass the Court after a decision; rather, he tried to intimidate it before a decision has been made. And that should be intolerable to all of us.'

    McConnell to Obama: Back off SCOTUS - POLITICO.com


    Would be nice if we could just impeach out POS POTUS and get move on.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  2. TorJohnson
    Offline

    TorJohnson BANNED

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2012
    Messages:
    60
    Thanks Received:
    30
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +30
    Yeah, then there's a nonpartisan legal analyst on CNN who says it's a "judicial hissy fit"

    [​IMG]


    Gee...who you gonna believe. Turtle man with an axe to grind or an independent analysis?

    Were you trying to post this as some sort of PROOF of something OTHER than Mitch McConnell's OPINION?

    Do you think being intellectually dishonest makes you any points or does the cause of conservatism any good?


    When you morons screech about every little thing that Obama does like it's the frickin end of the world, it makes Republicans look desperate. Success is self evident and we've got very little to show.

    Why don't you try being honest for once? Many states REQUIRE that if you use the roads, you have to be insured. How is that ANY DIFFERENT than requiring people who use medical services to be insured ?
    Oh, I suppose one could opt out of owning a car. Can one opt out of medical care? Is it in our interest to let people opt out of medical care? Court cases forcing parents to seek medical treatment for their sick children OVER the parents' religious beliefs tend to reinforce the precedent that the government CAN compel care for someone if it's in their best interests.

    So not only are mandates already established with precedents, but so is government telling you, you have to receive care if your life is in danger.

    Making a mountain out of a molehill only means that by the time the election rolls around, no one will believe you when you really do mean it when you cry wolf.
     
    Last edited: Apr 5, 2012
  3. SniperFire
    Offline

    SniperFire Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2012
    Messages:
    13,627
    Thanks Received:
    1,219
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Inside Your Head
    Ratings:
    +1,223
    I'll take a Senate leader's opinion vs. your Lefty mouthpiece.
     
  4. Conservative
    Offline

    Conservative Type 40

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2011
    Messages:
    17,082
    Thanks Received:
    2,026
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    Ratings:
    +2,030
    Really? If I walk on the road, thus using it, I must have insurance of some kind? OR, if I am a passenger in a car, or riding a bus, thus using the road, I must have insurance?

    Please. Learn prior to speaking. You'll look less foolish.

    http://chronicle.com/blogs/brainstorm/mandatory-health-insurance-is-not-like-mandatory-auto-insurance/7996
     
    Last edited: Apr 5, 2012
  5. BlindBoo
    Offline

    BlindBoo Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2010
    Messages:
    19,616
    Thanks Received:
    2,195
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +4,394
    Obviously with audio tape of the proceedings being released the veneer has been stripped off the Supreme Court. They are people, fallible like all the rest of us. The partisan divide is apparent. With that said the President has every right to say what he said.

    Lets open up the show to videos!
     
    Last edited: Apr 5, 2012
  6. SniperFire
    Offline

    SniperFire Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2012
    Messages:
    13,627
    Thanks Received:
    1,219
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Inside Your Head
    Ratings:
    +1,223


    A sitting POTUS threatening the SCOTUS before a verdict is rendered is just plain wrong.

    Obama needs to grow one of those little totalitarian mustaches to complete the effect.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  7. SniperFire
    Offline

    SniperFire Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2012
    Messages:
    13,627
    Thanks Received:
    1,219
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Inside Your Head
    Ratings:
    +1,223
    Former student of President Obama's law class cant believe what he is hearing from the President on SCOTUS.

    =========

    My Professor, My Judge, and the Doctrine of Judicial Review



    By Thom Lambert

    Imagine if you picked up your morning paper to read that one of your astronomy professors had publicly questioned whether the earth, in fact, revolves around the sun. Or suppose that one of your economics professors was quoted as saying that consumers would purchase more gasoline if the price would simply rise. Or maybe your high school math teacher was publicly insisting that 2 + 2 = 5. You’d be a little embarrassed, right? You’d worry that your colleagues and friends might begin to question your astronomical, economic, or mathematical literacy.

    Now you know how I felt this morning when I read in the Wall Street Journal that my own constitutional law professor had stated that it would be “an unprecedented, extraordinary step” for the Supreme Court to “overturn[] a law [i.e., the Affordable Care Act] that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress.” Putting aside the “strong majority” nonsense (the deeply unpopular Affordable Care Act got through the Senate with the minimum number of votes needed to survive a filibuster and passed 219-212 in the House), saying that it would be “unprecedented” and “extraordinary” for the Supreme Court to strike down a law that violates the Constitution is like saying that Kansas City is the capital of Kansas. Thus, a Wall Street Journal editorial queried this about the President who “famously taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago”: “[D]id he somehow not teach the historic case of Marbury v. Madison?”

    I actually know the answer to that question. It’s no (well, technically yes…he didn’t). President Obama taught “Con Law III” at Chicago. Judicial review, federalism, the separation of powers — the old “structural Constitution” stuff — is covered in “Con Law I” (or at least it was when I was a student). Con Law III covers the Fourteenth Amendment. (Oddly enough, Prof. Obama didn’t seem too concerned about “an unelected group of people” overturning a “duly constituted and passed law” when we were discussing all those famous Fourteenth Amendment cases – Roe v. Wade, Griswold v. Connecticut, Romer v. Evans, etc.) Of course, even a Con Law professor focusing on the Bill of Rights should know that the principle of judicial review has been alive and well since 1803, so I still feel like my educational credentials have been tarnished a bit by the President’s “unprecedented, extraordinary” remarks...
    http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2012/04/thom-lambert-bo-taught-me-con-law.php
     
  8. Papageorgio
    Offline

    Papageorgio The Ultimate Winner

    Joined:
    May 18, 2010
    Messages:
    25,639
    Thanks Received:
    3,891
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    Here
    Ratings:
    +9,502
    Where does the authority come from to require a citizen of the United States to purchase a service to remain in good standing of this country?

    What is the origin of debt that requires one person to pay for another persons health care?

    If one person is granted free health care and another person is fine for not purchasing health care, where is the equal protection under the law?
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  9. bodecea
    Offline

    bodecea Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2009
    Messages:
    89,060
    Thanks Received:
    10,372
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Location:
    #HasNoClothes
    Ratings:
    +23,651
    Oh good lord! Look! The Righties are crying again.
     
  10. CrusaderFrank
    Offline

    CrusaderFrank Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2009
    Messages:
    81,210
    Thanks Received:
    14,906
    Trophy Points:
    2,210
    Ratings:
    +36,954
    Larry Tribe said Obama's a fucking moron
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1

Share This Page