Obama stomps feet and throws tantrum aimed at SCOTUS

[The T]

What if Obama tell SCOTUS to try to enforce their decision?

Contempt of court? Didn't a judge tell him that what he was doing with his oil drilling ban was unlawful? Wjhat ever happened to that?

Is this a pattern with Obama? Ignoring the judiciary? The Constitution?


Judge halts Obama’s oil-drilling ban

 

[Valox]

It's been over stepping it's constitutional boundries for some time now.

lol...the court is the law. What they say goes.

Have you been in a coma since 1803?

 

[Liability]

It's been over stepping it's constitutional boundries for some time now.

lol...the court is the law. What they say goes.

Have you been in a coma since 1803?

I never agreed with that proposition.

In fact, I'd say it is pretty much just plain wrong.

 

[The T]

It's been over stepping it's constitutional boundries for some time now.

lol...the court is the law. What they say goes.

Have you been in a coma since 1803?

I never agreed with that proposition.

In fact, I'd say it is pretty much just plain wrong.

For edificaton of Valox...

(1803) First decision of the Supreme Court of the United States to declare an act of Congress unconstitutional, thus establishing the doctrine of judicial review. In 1801 newly elected Pres. Thomas Jefferson ordered Secretary of State James Madison to withhold from William Marbury the commission of his appointment by former Pres. John Adams as justice of the peace in the District of Columbia. Marbury then requested that the Supreme Court compel Madison to deliver his commission. In denying his request, the court held that it lacked jurisdiction because the section of the Judiciary Act passed by Congress in 1789 that authorized the Court to issue such a writ was unconstitutional and thus invalid. Chief Justice John Marshall, writing for the Court, declared that the Constitution must always take precedence in any conflict between it and a law passed by Congress.

Read more: Marbury v. Madison: Definition from Answers.com

 

[Valox]

It's been over stepping it's constitutional boundries for some time now.

lol...the court is the law. What they say goes.

Have you been in a coma since 1803?

I never agreed with that proposition.

In fact, I'd say it is pretty much just plain wrong.

Me neither, but I guess some nimwit has to edify me on it.

For edificaton of Valox...

lol....you aren't edifying shit for me buddy. Take your condescending attitude and shove it.

 

[freedombecki]

He's absolutely right.

Over the last decade the Supreme Court:

1-Decided and installed an American President.
2-Decided that private corporations can take over the land of a private citizen to further their own profit.
3-Decided that a state's laws prohibiting the keeping of hand guns went "to far".
4-Overturned a century's worth of election finance reform.
5-Decided there was a "time limit" on when an employee can bring a case against an employer for unfair wage discrimination
6-Decided that a Vice President's meetings with private corporations to determine public policy was secret and not subject to review.
7-Decided not to hear cases concerning indefinite detention.
8-Decided that police can strip search private citizens no matter what the cause.

It's a radical right wing court involved in judicial activism and legislating from the bench. It's been over stepping it's constitutional boundries for some time now.

Good on the President for pointing that out.

1 No, the people of the United States decided and installed the American President you claim the Supreme Court did. The SCOTUS merely agreed the vote in Florida would stand after 3 counts in favor of the same candidate. That's all they did and you know that's all they did.
2 Eminent domain is a fact of life. Cities grow, streets have to be widened, people get bought out cheap. You just pick yourself up, dust yourself off, and start over as best you can when it happens to you. It happened to my business as well as a piece of my property. I have to say it wasn't pleasant, but in the end, my community benefitted from it, and that made all the difference in the world to me.
3 It's their job to defend the Second Amendment. It's part and parcel of the Constitution.
4 Plugged loopholes against cheaters at the polls? aw, I'm hurtin' all over.
5. Other people get 2 years to settle money disputes. After that it's bye-bye money. Why divide citizens into classes and give one class a privilege over another as a consequence. That is sounding like the SCOTUS again supported the laws of the land.
6 That's right. Those meetings were to benefit people who employed boatloads of people at very good wages. Government function of the executive branch does not need to be impeded by the judicial branch when fairness is around, and that's all there is to it.
7 Case against indefinite detention was turned away? Well, the consequences of the crime may have been another got an indefinite detention wrongfully, on the other side.
8 The police can check to make sure a killer isn't hiding a set of brass knuckles in his rectum. Aw, too bad.

I really hate debating the good-looking studs around here ...

 

[regent]

A number of presidents have had problems with the court. The first was Jefferson, and then Jackson, Jackson who did not enforce a Court Decision, and Lincoln who said, "the candid citizen must confess that if the policy of government... is to be irrrevocably fixed by decisions of the Supreme Court... the people will have ceased to be their own rulers .... Chief Justice Taney wrote of Lincoln. "he certainly does not faithfully execute the laws. And of course FDR had his problems. History seems filled with these executive, and legislative conflicts with the Court.

 

[Listening]

What if Obama tell SCOTUS to try to enforce their decision?

What if we tell Obama to try and enforce his law ?

 

[The T]

What if Obama tell SCOTUS to try to enforce their decision?

What if we tell Obama to try and enforce his law ?

He will try...and that's the point here. He doesn't care a wit of the law.

A Judge told him that his Drilling ban was illegal...Obama goes on anyway like the Judge never spoke a word.

Obama has contempt for this Republic.

When are people going to realize it?

 

[Listening]

What if Obama tell SCOTUS to try to enforce their decision?

What if we tell Obama to try and enforce his law ?

He will try...and that's the point here. He doesn't care a wit of the law.

A Judge told him that his Drilling ban was illegal...Obama goes on anyway like the Judge never spoke a word.

Obama has contempt for this Republic.

When are people going to realize it?

That could be a REAL problem.

 

[The T]

lol...the court is the law. What they say goes.

Have you been in a coma since 1803?

I never agreed with that proposition.

In fact, I'd say it is pretty much just plain wrong.

Me neither, but I guess some nimwit has to edify me on it.

For edificaton of Valox...

lol....you aren't edifying shit for me buddy. Take your condescending attitude and shove it.

When you find a better MAN than you to enforce your edict? YOU let me know, will you asswipe?

 

[Dr Grump]

[
A Judge told him that his Drilling ban was illegal...Obama goes on anyway like the Judge never spoke a word.

What judge, where?

 

[Valox]

I never agreed with that proposition.

In fact, I'd say it is pretty much just plain wrong.

Me neither, but I guess some nimwit has to edify me on it.

For edificaton of Valox...

lol....you aren't edifying shit for me buddy. Take your condescending attitude and shove it.

When you find a better MAN than you to enforce your edict? YOU let me know, will you asswipe?

Na-Nu Na-Nu, care to translate this into English?

 

[The T]

[
A Judge told him that his Drilling ban was illegal...Obama goes on anyway like the Judge never spoke a word.

What judge, where?

Judge halts Obama’s oil-drilling ban

 

[Dr Grump]

[
A Judge told him that his Drilling ban was illegal...Obama goes on anyway like the Judge never spoke a word.

What judge, where?

Judge halts Obama’s oil-drilling ban

So every time a judge makes a decision he or she thinks is illegal, then they are right? Why have a congress or a president? just let the judiciary run the country...

 

[jillian]

He's absolutely right.

Over the last decade the Supreme Court:

1-Decided and installed an American President.
2-Decided that private corporations can take over the land of a private citizen to further their own profit.
3-Decided that a state's laws prohibiting the keeping of hand guns went "to far".
4-Overturned a century's worth of election finance reform.
5-Decided there was a "time limit" on when an employee can bring a case against an employer for unfair wage discrimination
6-Decided that a Vice President's meetings with private corporations to determine public policy was secret and not subject to review.
7-Decided not to hear cases concerning indefinite detention.
8-Decided that police can strip search private citizens no matter what the cause.

It's a radical right wing court involved in judicial activism and legislating from the bench. It's been over stepping it's constitutional boundries for some time now.

Good on the President for pointing that out.

1 No, the people of the United States decided and installed the American President you claim the Supreme Court did. The SCOTUS merely agreed the vote in Florida would stand after 3 counts in favor of the same candidate. That's all they did and you know that's all they did.
2 Eminent domain is a fact of life. Cities grow, streets have to be widened, people get bought out cheap. You just pick yourself up, dust yourself off, and start over as best you can when it happens to you. It happened to my business as well as a piece of my property. I have to say it wasn't pleasant, but in the end, my community benefitted from it, and that made all the difference in the world to me.
3 It's their job to defend the Second Amendment. It's part and parcel of the Constitution.
4 Plugged loopholes against cheaters at the polls? aw, I'm hurtin' all over.
5. Other people get 2 years to settle money disputes. After that it's bye-bye money. Why divide citizens into classes and give one class a privilege over another as a consequence. That is sounding like the SCOTUS again supported the laws of the land.
6 That's right. Those meetings were to benefit people who employed boatloads of people at very good wages. Government function of the executive branch does not need to be impeded by the judicial branch when fairness is around, and that's all there is to it.
7 Case against indefinite detention was turned away? Well, the consequences of the crime may have been another got an indefinite detention wrongfully, on the other side.
8 The police can check to make sure a killer isn't hiding a set of brass knuckles in his rectum. Aw, too bad.

I really hate debating the good-looking studs around here ...

no becki, your number 1 is incorrect. the SCOTUS stopped the count. this specifically went against precedent which always deferred to the highest court of a state making decisions about that state's election laws. so that is not "all that they did". the decision is so bad that for the only time i know of in the history of the high court, they said the decision could not be used as precedent.

 

[The T]

What judge, where?

Judge halts Obama’s oil-drilling ban

So every time a judge makes a decision he or she thinks is illegal, then they are right? Why have a congress or a president? just let the judiciary run the country...

Not what it means, does it?

But you knew that.

 

[Dr Grump]

Judge halts Obama’s oil-drilling ban

So every time a judge makes a decision he or she thinks is illegal, then they are right? Why have a congress or a president? just let the judiciary run the country...

Not what it means, does it?

But you knew that.

Doesn't it? And is the judge right anyway..

The screaming, crying and gnashing of teeth from the right when the oil spill occured - and somehow it was all Obama's fault - had to be heard to be beleived.

Now, because the politicians are worried their constituents will feed them to the sharks in the next election cycle, they are worreid about the loss of jobs etc due to the moratorium. Talking about wanting you cake and eating it too. Obama is in a lose-lose situation.

Don't allowing drilling = arsehole
Allow drilling and the same thing happens again before safety procedures are in place = arsehole

Some people are never satisfied....

 

[jillian]

What judge, where?

Judge halts Obama’s oil-drilling ban

So every time a judge makes a decision he or she thinks is illegal, then they are right? Why have a congress or a president? just let the judiciary run the country...

Judge Feldman

owned stock in Transocean, the company that owned the Deepwater Horizon rig, as well as in other oil companies which could be affected by the moratorium.[8] Feldman's 2009 financial disclosure report [2] indicates that he had financial investments in BlackRock, the largest holder of BP stock. Additionally, Feldman held stock in Exxon-Mobil, a company that operates one of the 33 deepwater rigs.

Hornbeck Offshore Services LLC v. Salazar - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[edit]

 

[regent]

So the irony of the whole Supreme Court thing is that while the Court was never given the power to declare a law unconstitutonal, we accept the Courts power to do so simply because the Court said it had that power.