Alright, here’s what Newt actually said in the interview:
“Here’s the key — it’s always two out of three. If the president and the congress say the court is wrong, in the end the court would lose. If the congress and the court say the president is wrong, in the end the president would lose. And if the president and the court agreed, the congress loses. The founding fathers designed the constitution very specifically in a Montesquieu spirit of the laws to have a balance of power not to have a dictatorship by any one of the three branches.”
The article is misrepresenting Newt’s position, because there was no ‘should’ in his argument. Notice how that changes the entire nature of the argument.
And notice how many Freepers are doing drive by’s and making snarky comments based solely on the headlines? Same thing going on at Lucianne and some others too.
Newt may not be able to survive a media full of BS headline writers and a nation of drive by faux political philosophers (and those are the good guys).