Posted on 01/28/2010 11:25:19 AM PST by Welshman007
For the first time in U.S. history a sitting President has used the State-of-the-Union speech to slam the U.S. Supreme Court--one of the three branches of the federal government. Even FDR in his rage over the Court's many decisions that declared his programs unconstitutional did not dare take a swipe at the Justices during a State-of-the-Union speech.
Given the historic nature of the Obama attack, one would think that the issue at hand is one of extreme national significance that represents the outrage of Congress and the citizens concerning a Court ruling.
Not in this case.
The issue is restoring the First Amendment right to free speech and free expression, which the Congress infringed by passing into law the ominous McCain-Feingold bill under the guise of 'campaign finance reform.'
(Excerpt) Read more at examiner.com ...
This supremely arrogant president may just get his wings clipped by SCOTUS. One can hope, anyway.
What should we expect from someone who has less experience dealing with federal government than a freshman senator half way through his first term?
How can someone who has no experience doing anything but seducing fools be expected to know protocol for actually doing anything?
I know Alito didn’t mean to get picked up on camera, but this is now two in a row and should PROVE to the Republican’s that spontaneous outbursts is good policy during Obama speeches.
You get great media attention and the American people rally
He was not the first and will not be the last president to criticize a Supreme Court decision in the State of the Union Address.
Samuel Alito, You are a Real American!
Remember, Alito’s wife had to run out of the room because of his attempted Borking and High Tech Lynching by the rats.
Personally, I’d love it if the Supreme Court decided not to attend next year’s SOTU and doesn’t inform the TOTUS. I’d love shot after shot of nine empty chairs.
Maybe the SC should look into zero’s sealed records. Why would someone seal their records?
President Wrong on Citizens United Case [Bradley A. Smith]Tonight the president engaged in demogoguery of the worst kind, when he claimed that last week's Supreme Court decision in Citizens United v. FEC, "open[ed] the floodgates for special interests — including foreign corporations — to spend without limit in our elections. Well I don't think American elections should be bankrolled by America's most powerful interests, or worse, by foreign entities."
The president's statement is false.
The Court held that 2 U.S.C. Section 441a, which prohibits all corporate political spending, is unconstitutional. Foreign nationals, specifically defined to include foreign corporations, are prohibiting from making "a contribution or donation of money or ather thing of value, or to make an express or implied promise to make a contribution or donation, in connection with a Federal, State or local election" under 2 U.S.C. Section 441e, which was not at issue in the case. Foreign corporations are also prohibited, under 2 U.S.C. 441e, from making any contribution or donation to any committee of any political party, and they prohibited from making any "expenditure, independent expenditure, or disbursement for an electioneering communication."
This is either blithering ignorance of the law or demagoguery of the worst kind.
— Bradley A. Smith is Josiah H. Blackmore II/Shirley M. Nault Designated Professor of Law at Capital University Law School
I wonder if B.O. has ticked off the wrong entity this time. It was like a schoolyard taunt to see those infantile Dems screeching like banshees after those classless remarks. I could almost read the minds of the justices as they suffered through his rambling, disconnected speech: “Who in the world does this man think he IS!” I’m sure it took every ounce of restraint Alito could muster to sit there and endure false accusations. And I noticed that even Sotomayor looked stunned.
So, who was the first? And....do ya have a link to that?
Since Roe v. Wade in 1973 there have been five Republican Presidents that have delivered 20 State of the Union Addresses and most if not all have rightfully criticized the Roe v. Wade decision during their State of the Union Address.
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.