Tuesday, April 03, 2012

Obama Declares War On The Supreme Court

Once again, Barack Obama has set a precedent, behaving like no other president in our history.

In a press conference yesterday, the president responded to what was obviously a planted question from out of left field to attack the Supreme Court on ObamaCare, saying the "unelected" Supreme Court had better not to take the "extraordinary" and "unprecedented" step of "overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress".

The strong majority part of this president's remarks should make anyone do a double take. ObamaCare was shoved through the House 219-212 without even it's proponents having a chance to read it, without any Republican votes and a number of Democrats voting against it. It passed in the Senate with the aid of bribes and ( remember the Corn Husker Kickback and the Louisiana Purchase?)and violations of parliamentary procedure never seen before in the Senate. It remains unpopular with the majority of Americans today. Strong majority? What planet does the president live on?

This is not the first time this president has attacked the High Court. Some of you may remember his insulting foray against them as his State of the Union Address in 2010,on national TV with the justices sitting in the audience...with the result that in 2011, the justices chose not to attend.

Looking at what the president had to say,there's likely a very good reason we haven't seen his college transcripts. The courts strike down laws passed by Congress and state legislatures all the time. Roe v Wade, a decision this president holds very dear to his heart is just one example. California's Proposition 8 was another. And sometimes, the executive branch simply refuses to do their constitutionally mandated duty for political purposes and defend laws passed by the legislative branch. Obama's Attorney General Holder, with the president as his cheerleader is refusing to defend the Defense of Marriage Act as I write this.

So the "extraordinary" and "unprecedented" action by the Court President Obama is whining about is neither. What's actually extraordinary and unprecedented is a sitting president attempting to put political pressure on the Supreme court while a pending matter is before them.

These are the statements of a president who has no respect for separation of powers or for the oath he swore to uphold.

The president also accused the Court of "judicial activism".

He said that for years, conservatives had been arguing that the "unelected" Supreme Court should not adopt an activist approach by making rather than interpreting law, and said that striking down ObamaCare would be an example.

"I am pretty confident that this court will recognize that and not take that step."

Obviously, this president doesn't understand or respect the difference between determining the constitutionality of existing law and creating new law from scratch from the bench.

Here's what likely happened. The Supreme Court took a preliminary vote on Friday after hearing the arguments. Whatever the results were, they were communicated to the president from a rat on the inside, most likely Justice Kagen, who until recently was Obama's Solicitor General and is a long time political soulmate.

The president's staff reached out to one of their media lackeys, the obviously planted question was asked and the rehearsed answer given.

What remains is to figure out why.It might be simple Chicago-style thuggery but...walk with me awhile.

This president knows ObamaCare doesn't poll well, and that it has given Republicans a signature issue to campaign on against him.Imagine what would happen if the president decided that deliberately throwing ObamaCare under the bus would actually help his re-election?

Let's say the Supreme Court were to overturn ObamaCare.

The Republicans would instantly be deprived of a unifying an important issue, where as the president would gain one and could now campaign by pledging to 'give you back your healthcare' and appoint new left leaning justices to make sure 'this time, we get it right.'

Employers, especially small businesses would start hiring again now that the monster of ObamaCare was no longer part of their calculations. Unemployment would decrease, the stock market would go up and the president could claim that America is 'on the right track again' thanks to his policies. As people perceived the economy starting to get better, it might just be enough to get Barack Obama re-elected.

At this point, I ask you to remember a scene from an old movie, Mel Brooks' wonderful 'The Producers'. For those of you not familiar with it,the plot involves two Broadway producers who try to run a scam by deliberately putting on a flop musical, juggling the books and absconding with the investor's money.In one hilarious scene, Mel Brooks attempts to ensure a horrible review by blatantly attempting to bribe a theater critic, which the critic scornfully rejects out of hand.

Now, riddle me this. If you were Barack Hussein Obama and you had decided to deliberately see to it that ObamaCare was repealed to help your re-election efforts, what better way to try to ensure ObamaCare's repeal in the Supreme Court than by threatening, insulting and pressuring the justices publicly?

And if that makes you queasy,imagining someone like that in charge of the country for another four years ought to bring on projectile vomiting.


louielouie said...

or for the oath he swore to uphold.

he stood there. he raised his hand. he said the words. ok, he had to say them twice........
but if you think he took the oath of office seriously, i've got some land in nigeria.
put you down for five/six acres? you pay upfront.
and if you give me the stuff about lying being impeachable, i'll repeat to you, your comment to me about hussein, the convenience store clerk, a shooting, and the US senate.
didn't you say something about eric holder and his cheerleader?

louielouie said...

imagining someone like that in charge of the country for another four years

.....that should be the only unifying issue necessary.
anything else and the electorate is dumber than a sack of hair.