Posted on 02/04/2011 9:12:28 PM PST by John Semmens
Federal Judge Roger Vinson’s ruling that President Obama’s health care law is unconstitutional need not be obeyed says Senator Assistant Senate Majority Leader Dick Durbin (D-Ill).
“The Courts aren’t the only ones authorized to decide the Constitutionality of the laws,” Durbin insisted. “We all—Congress and President, alike—take an oath to uphold the Constitution. Just because the Court has a different opinion doesn’t mean the President must accept it.”
“This wouldn’t be the first time a President ignored a Court decision,” Durbin observed. “Back in the 1830s, President Jackson chose to ignore a Supreme Court decision—telling then Chief Justice John Marshall to enforce his own decision. So, President Obama ignoring a lower court decision is small potatoes in comparison. In the final analysis, the President is the Commander-in-Chief. The Army and all federal law enforcement personnel answer to him. If he doesn’t want to abide by a court decision who’s going to make him?”
The Court decision President Andrew Jackson chose to ignore was one asserting that Indians had sovereign rights that the US and state governments had to respect. Subsequently, the Cherokee Tribe was forcibly evicted from its land by the US Army so it could be seized by the State of Georgia.
In related news, Obama Administration spokeswoman Tracy Schmaler said that Vinson’s ruling will have “no effect on our implementation of the health care reform law,” calling it “a rogue decision by a judge who is out of step with modern judicial thinking. It is one thing for courts to make laws that help people. It is another thing entirely when a judge tries to overturn the efforts of Congress and the President to help people. Quite simply, Judge Vinson is guilty of the wrong kind of judicial activism.”
read more...
http://azconserv1.wordpress.com/2011/02/05/senator-urges-president-to-ignore-court-ruling/
You LOL, but the distinction fades not to the fault of John.
Mr Semmens, don’t interpret that as a lack appreciation of your fine work. Hopefully, you will one day immortalize your genius to a paperback.
but the distinction fades not to the fault of John.
Eh?
dayglored,
Thx for the spirited defense of my work.
There has been some debate over how my posts should be marked. Some want SATIRE in bold everywhere. Others want no warnings anywhere. I have compromised posting the word “satire” in two places in each post—right under the title and in “key words.”
My intent isn’t to “catch” anyone. My intent is the classical satiric purpose of ridicule. I start with real events and add the absurd liberal thought processes that probably inspired the actions, but weren’t explicitly stated by the actors.
I recognize that not everyone appreciates my style. I don’t insist that they should. But I’ve never called TN4Liberty (or anyone else) a “name.” The assertion that I have is incorrect (or worse). I like to believe that we are all on the same side. We each fight for liberty in our own way. There are enough targets on the left without us turning on each other.
The Left has perverted reality to the point it’s nearly indistinguishable from satire.
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.