Posted on 04/02/2012 12:46:07 PM PDT by Deo volente
President Obama, employing his strongest language to date on the Supreme Court review of the federal health care overhaul, cautioned the court Monday against overturning the law -- while repeatedly saying he's "confident" it will be upheld.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
“We don’t need no stinkin’ Constitution” says Comrade Obama.
bump for later read
He’s right for a change. If he had Obamacare, Michael Jackson would still be with us! Singing. (An upcoming re-election slogan test.)
It seems to me that his arrogant, piss-poor attitude towards the justices just may piss them off, and have a negative effect on his signature legislation being kept intact.
I imagine it is slightly out of context. He’s claiming they should uphold it because it’s the right thing to do, even if the constitutionality of it is a bit... hazy. Not like they haven’t upheld terrible laws before. Remember Dred-Scott?
And the tactic is like kryptonite to the right. They are powerless to counter it. At least I have never seen the right successfully counter the tactic.
“As someone pointed out upthread, he could have won bigtime and is NOW talking tough, so when the decision is announced, people will see it was Barry who straightened the court out.”
That certainly could be the case, but I tend to think the opposite is true. I believe he knows his signature piece of legislation is going down. When Obama has had a victory in the past, he certainly hasn’t acted like this: He didn’t get confrontational, but was arrogant and cocky.
This tells me that Obama knows the decision, which is that the SCOUTUS will uphold Obamacare. This will give him bragging rights of providing universal coverage AND that he faced down the white man's court. He'll go down in history as the baddest brotha evah.
Obama is a racist Communist egomaniac but he's not stupid and he wouldn't be getting into the face of the SCOTUS unless he knew he held the winning hand.
If they allow him to get away with it, then only an act of God can stop him.
If it goes 6-3 Kagan will not be with the majority, at least not for your reason. Think about it. If she didn’t recuse herself from this process in the beginning, she won’t in the future. Because regardless of what side has the majority, it has no impact on the fact she as Solicitor General put the defense of Obamacare together and she IS violating the law by not recusing herself now. She is doing all this NOW when they probably DO NOT have the votes, she will not recuse if they can rule in favor of it. She wants to be able to vote for it.
If she didn’t recuse herself now, she won’t in the future. If she did they’d ask why she didn’t in the past and what’s changed? Nothing would have changed to cause her to recuse. Her SG past is enough to recuse herself NOW.
Par for the course.
A few thoughts:
(1) That last quote will go down in the annals of presidential tautological tautologies. The law “will be upheld because it should be upheld.” Such insight!
(2) Yes, the US Supreme Court is — and always has been — an “unelected” body. And? Are you hinting, Mr. President, that the American people ought not respect the final decisions of the High Court, or that the institution no longer serves as the ultimate arbiter of constitutionality? Such a departure would, indeed, be “unprecedented” — the true definition of which appears to elude our Harvard Law graduate president. Also, since when does this president object to panels of unelected, unaccountable federal appointees making decisions about people’s lives, with no possibility for further appeal? Suddenly, it’s no longer a feature.
(3) In all seriousness, in what conceivable way would SCOTUS striking down a law it determined to be unconstitutional constitute an “unprecedented” act? Supreme Court majorities have been doing exactly that since establishing the practice of judicial review in 1803’s landmark Marbury v. Madison decision. Heritage’s Lachlan Markay reports that the Court has struck down 53 federal laws in the last 30 years alone. Unprecedented!
(4) Actually, a “strong majority” did not pass Obamacare. You’ll recall that the 24 hours directly preceding Obamacare’s passage was fraught with desperate vote whipping and deal-making. It was eventually dragged across the finish line in the House by a razor-thin margin, with dozens of Democrats joining a united Republican front opposing the law. Besides, the size of a congressional majority has no bearing on a law’s root constitutionality — a point one might assume a former law school lecturer would grasp.
(5) As for the president’s “confident” (is he ever anything but?) prediction that the American people won’t stand for such an exercise of “judicial activism,” perhaps the president should re-examine, you know, virtually every single piece of polling data on the matter. In fact, the American people are demanding that the court rein in the Reid/Pelosi Congress’ worst piece of legislative excess.
I SO wish we had another choice besides Romney--but even with "Obama light" we will be much better off because of the threat Obama poses to the corner stone on which our nation stands--the Constitution!
I believe he did it on purpose to make sure they knock it down.
He’s got at least three issues to run on then.
1. Re-elect me to “fix” the court.
2. Re-elect me and I’ll pass healthcare again.
3. Re-elect me to keep redistributing whitey’s money around to you folks who really deserve it.
Trying to “tamper” with the SCOTUS? Obama must be getting nervous
Obama MUST go!!!
If she votes with the majority on a law that is going down anyhow, it will allow the Left to unleash a big gun attack against all of us for being “paranoid and delusional” when we called on her to recuse.
“Hussein despises the Constitution.”
Does anyone really think SCOTUS will prevent him from signing an executive order and making it so? Who will stop him from doing anything. The Constitution presumed it would be followed by honorable men. Hussein doesn’t qualify as one.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.