Chief Justice Roberts--refers to State of the Union address as a pep rally.

[WillowTree]

Did the other supremes whine and carry on when criticised?

They should be allowed to stand and refute.. Like Joe Wilson.. You ******* lie! ha ha ha ha! bet that would put an end to that shit.

 

[Claudette]

Yes. I saw it. Very tacky indeed.

The Prez was wrong to boot. You'd think someone who was a law professor would indeed know the law.

Oh well. If I were the Supreme Court it would be a cold day in hell before I attended another SOTU address. 9 empty chairs should look quite good doncha thinnk???

You meant that constitutionally require SOTU? And what law do you think the POTUS doesn't know? If you're referring to the SCOTUS decision that he was talking about in the SOTU, you should read up on the decision and what Roberts told the other justices about the notion that their decision would allow foreign American incorporated corporations to pay for ads direrctly from their treasury.

I did read up on that decision.

The SC addressed one part of the law and decided that corporations must be treated as individuals with the same rights on campaign contributions. The did however not touch the part of the law that exempts foreigners from contributing to our elections. That was what Justice Alito was referring to when he said Ol'BO was wrong

Some felt that this remaining law was rather weak So they are working to strengthen it.


Late Update: Sure enough, Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) says he's working on legislation to fix the problem, declaring: "There's a big danger that the decision opens the door to foreign owned corporations indirectly spending millions of dollars to influence the outcome of U.S. elections through their American subsidiaries."

 

[Dutch]

Yea the republicans are never openly critical of a Supreme Court ruling.

hey asswipe. pay attention. Roberts says dissent is fine. But, asswipe, here's the rub, in the SOTUA with all the lunatics jumping to their feet hootin n a hollerin is not so fine.. need some notepaper?

Called an asswipe by Willow Tree. I am offically a member now.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

Roberts is obviously right. The Democrats should be embarrassed by their behavior. What else can they destroy? I've said it before and i'll say it again...We currently have a bunch of spoiled Marxist indoctrinated School Kids running our country at this point. Very few in this current administration have any real-life experience such as running a business and such. They were indoctrinated and trained on the Anti-American Marxist ideology in their college years. Just a gang of spoiled and delusional kids destroying our nation. Make 2010 count people.

 

[hjmick]

January 25th, 1988, Reagans State of the Union Adress. That was too easy. Google Reagan, State of The Union, abortion.

And Roosevelt. So, in all this time only three Presidents have criticized SCOTUS in their State of the Union address. According to The American Presidency Project, SCOTUS has been mentioned, in some form or another, only seventeen times in State of the Union addresses.

I'm not saying that SCOTUS is above criticism, nor am I saying that the President shouldn't voice his concerns regarding a SCOTUS decision, hell, I'm not even saying he can't or shouldn't do it during his State of the Union. But I am saying, in my opinion it is bad form, no matter who the President may be...

Roosevelt, Reagan, or Obama.

Isn't a SOTU address supposed to give us the POTUS' view of the state of the union? Should (bad or good) form dictate that information be omitted?

Traditionally such criticism in a SOTU has been thought a breach of decorum. Of course, Alito's reaction was a touch rude, but I'd chalk that up to surprise more than anything else.

And while we're on the subject, let us not forget that Obama was wrong...

Adam Winkler: Alito Was Rude (But Right)

 

[Claudette]

And Roosevelt. So, in all this time only three Presidents have criticized SCOTUS in their State of the Union address. According to The American Presidency Project, SCOTUS has been mentioned, in some form or another, only seventeen times in State of the Union addresses.

I'm not saying that SCOTUS is above criticism, nor am I saying that the President shouldn't voice his concerns regarding a SCOTUS decision, hell, I'm not even saying he can't or shouldn't do it during his State of the Union. But I am saying, in my opinion it is bad form, no matter who the President may be...

Roosevelt, Reagan, or Obama.

Isn't a SOTU address supposed to give us the POTUS' view of the state of the union? Should (bad or good) form dictate that information be omitted?

Traditionally such criticism in a SOTU has been thought a breach of decorum. Of course, Alito's reaction was a touch rude, but I'd chalk that up to surprise more than anything else.

And while we're on the subject, let us not forget that Obama was wrong...

Adam Winkler: Alito Was Rude (But Right)

Well I don't think Justice Alito was rude at all.

The rude one was the POTUS who attacked the Supreme Court in the middle of his speech. Something that is just not done.

I have watched many SOTU speechs and have never heard a sitting Prez attack the SC.

Rude indeed.

 

[uscitizen]

So a foreign owned US located corporation cannot freely make political donations?

Say Toyota America or whatever they call their US operations.

From your link Mick.

"And it does open up a loophole that allows foreign corporations to influence federal elections through their U.S. subsidiaries."

so I was correct as per usual. That gets boring though.

 

[AvgGuyIA]

Roberts is obviously right. The Democrats should be embarrassed by their behavior. What else can they destroy? I've said it before and i'll say it again...We currently have a bunch of spoiled Marxist indoctrinated School Kids running our country at this point. Very few in this current administration have any real-life experience such as running a business and such. They were indoctrinated and trained on the Anti-American Marxist ideology in their college years. Just a gang of spoiled and delusional kids destroying our nation. Make 2010 count people.

It was inappropriate for the Democrats to jump up hooting and hollering with the Supreme Court Justices sitting there. Obviously, it goes to prove that Democrat congressmen come from very low classes and have the class of a guy who couldn't sell watermelons on the side of the road in Texas if a State Trooper stopped traffic for him.

 

[AvgGuyIA]

So a foreign owned US located corporation cannot freely make political donations?

Say Toyota America or whatever they call their US operations.

From your link Mick.

"And it does open up a loophole that allows foreign corporations to influence federal elections through their U.S. subsidiaries."

so I was correct as per usual. That gets boring though.

Oh yeah, like foreign entities weren't contributing to Obama's campaign using his website as a front end. You don't collect $750 million dollars for a campaign from passing the collection plate around at pep rallies.

 

[uscitizen]

So a foreign owned US located corporation cannot freely make political donations?

Say Toyota America or whatever they call their US operations.

From your link Mick.

"And it does open up a loophole that allows foreign corporations to influence federal elections through their U.S. subsidiaries."

so I was correct as per usual. That gets boring though.

Oh yeah, like foreign entities weren't contributing to Obama's campaign using his website as a front end. You don't collect $750 million dollars for a campaign from passing the collection plate around at pep rallies.

And Obama's campaign has what to do with this issue?
Strawman?

 

[Rambunctious]

This man is cheapening our Nation.

 

[Article 15]

The State of the Union has been nothing but a pep rally for a while now.

 

[oreo]

[QUOTE=Dutch;2086098]Yea the republicans are never openly critical of a Supreme Court ruling. [/QUOTE]



Never during a state of the union speech--with all justices sitting "below" the President getting bad-mouthed by a President--on National T.V.

It just goes to show the absolute arrogance of this empty suit President you have elected.

 

[uscitizen]

This man is cheapening our Nation.

Discount lobbiest rates?