Obama's "warning" to the supreme court?!?!?!

[Guest]

If he is so confident they will not reject his bill then why the warning??

Combative Obama warns Supreme Court on health law - Yahoo! News Canada (http://ca.news.yahoo.com/combative-obama-warns-supreme-court-health-law-192629533.html)

Just like he rammed the bill through congress, he is now working the supreme court to be sure his legacy (??) stays in tact.

What a surprise from the ultimate deal making, POTUS.

Don't be surprised if in fact at some point we will hear from the justices that they did not have enough time to fully read and understand what the bill actually says and does; therefore they have no choice but to resort to previous precedent and promote the bill without knowing what is in it.

btk

[Guest]

If he is so confident they will not reject his bill then why the warning??

Combative Obama warns Supreme Court on health law - Yahoo! News Canada (http://ca.news.yahoo.com/combative-obama-warns-supreme-court-health-law-192629533.html)

Just like he rammed the bill through congress, he is now working the supreme court to be sure his legacy (??) stays in tact.

What a surprise from the ultimate deal making, POTUS.

Don't be surprised if in fact at some point we will hear from the justices that they did not have enough time to fully read and understand what the bill actually says and does; therefore they have no choice but to resort to previous precedent and promote the bill without knowing what is in it.

btk

And what happened to that Republican mantra about "activist judges"?

[Guest]

And what happened to that Republican mantra about "activist judges"?It won't be too long before we find out how the Court decides. But if the polls don't change a whole lot in Mitt Romney's favor--forget about Santorum or Gingrich, they're so far behind Obama it's not reasonable that they could ever catch up--then Obama will very likely appoint at least one more Supreme Court justice, if not two or three. Then it will be interesting to hear the arguments that the nominees may be "activist judges".

The sad thing about that possible outcome is that by contributing to a broken government for several years, then conducting maybe the most self-destructive presidential primary in memory, the GOP did it to themselves.

[Guest]

And what happened to that Republican mantra about "activist judges"?

Tell me the last time a sitting President of the United States called out the Supreme Court and even alluded to their not being elected.

Arrogant is one word that comes to mind. I am sure that both sides have talked about activists judges, but a sitting President is unusual if it ever happened especially using the words he used.

All could have been avoided had he done what he said he would do...ie, address health care costs, tort reform and done it, instead of in back rooms while making deals, in public.

This President just plain feels better than almost anyone !

[Guest]

FDR did not have a good relationship with the court.

[Guest]

Potus must have been listening to the Reverend Wright in one ear and Ayers in the other ear when his Constitutonal Law professor was lecturing on Checks and Balances.

[Guest]

FDR did not have a good relationship with the court.

Oh I realize that and glad you brought it up just to keep the record straight, BUT my question was about a sitting President AT THIS STAGE, ie. deliberations just begun, to say what he said, especially the veiled threat about not being elected !!

[Guest]

It won't be too long before we find out how the Court decides. But if the polls don't change a whole lot in Mitt Romney's favor--forget about Santorum or Gingrich, they're so far behind Obama it's not reasonable that they could ever catch up--then Obama will very likely appoint at least one more Supreme Court justice, if not two or three. Then it will be interesting to hear the arguments that the nominees may be "activist judges".

The sad thing about that possible outcome is that by contributing to a broken government for several years, then conducting maybe the most self-destructive presidential primary in memory, the GOP did it to themselves.

IMO, if ever there was a statement that should rally the conservative base it is the one highlighted above.

[Guest]

I believe Obama has reached one of two conclusions. He is a one term POTUS and does not care/fear any retribution for anything he says or does.
Or he has concluded he is unbeatable and could care/fear even less.

Telling the Russians to openly wait until after the election to use his "flexibility" (= no worry about the electorate any more and do what ever). Then when we the people gasp, he makes a joke of it. We the people in their fickle norm roll over and do nothing more....again.

Now stepping out of line, again, to threaten the Supreme Court justices and make his will known....or else?

His actions identify him as arrogant and unconcerned about anything other than his agenda. He continues to take liberties with the office of POTUS and the Constitution which he swore to uphold as a condition of office....unlike any POTUS before him.

His WH staff and support team and of course the ever present media all are geared to insulate him from wrong doing or criticism. Hence he becomes more arrogant with each passing test of the system he becomes more bold in his actions.

The man raises and or confirms doubts about his role and agenda each and every passing day.

We the people that fell for his charm the first time around should take heed of his performance before they head to the ballot box.

For those who happen to be not alarmed at his actions and performance or lack of performance, to be polite about it we can only conclude they have been charmed.

btk

[Guest]

The court will overturn obamacare and Obama in Nov will loose in a landslide.

Watch and see.

[Guest]

The court will overturn obamacare and Obama in Nov will loose in a landslide.

Watch and see.

Probably only if Mitt Romney gets the Presidential bid and he puts in someone like a Bush or someone very closely connected to the Bushes as VP. That could be Ms. Rice or Colin Powell.

I cannot see any of the people mentioned above though actually back into politics at that level.

[Guest]

And what happened to that Republican mantra about "activist judges"?

"Activist judges" are judges that "make law". Overturning a law that was written in violation of Constitutional powers does not rise to the level of activism.

[Guest]

"Activist judges" are judges that "make law". Overturning a law that was written in violation of Constitutional powers does not rise to the level of activism.

Only when the Republicans want that definition of "activist judges" to apply though. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/24/us/politics/republicans-turn-judicial-power-into-a-campaign-issue.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all

Not when gay rights, abortion, or other issues come before the Supreme Court that is. Then, Republicans have a different definition of the US Supreme Court Justices stepping in.

[Guest]

The court will overturn obamacare and Obama in Nov will loose in a landslide.

Watch and see.

Bookmarked!

Xavier

[Guest]

"Activist judges" are judges that "make law". Overturning a law that was written in violation of Constitutional powers does not rise to the level of activism.

how could obama have passed constitutional law much less taught it if he does not recognize that the supremes are just doing thier job - ruling on the constitutionality of obamacare? sheesh!

[Guest]

Only when the Republicans want that definition of "activist judges" to apply though. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/24/us/politics/republicans-turn-judicial-power-into-a-campaign-issue.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all

Not when gay rights, abortion, or other issues come before the Supreme Court that is. Then, Republicans have a different definition of the US Supreme Court Justices stepping in.

The liberal NYT can twist the story and the law any way they wish; it does not make it so.

[Guest]

Only when the Republicans want that definition of "activist judges" to apply though. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/24/us/politics/republicans-turn-judicial-power-into-a-campaign-issue.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all

Not when gay rights, abortion, or other issues come before the Supreme Court that is. Then, Republicans have a different definition of the US Supreme Court Justices stepping in.

You really and truly see no difference between words of politicians on both sides over the years concerning political activism on the court and a SITTING US PRESIDENT MAKING THREATS JUST AS DELIBERATIONS BEGIN ?

Please tell me that at least you can see THAT difference !!

[Guest]

You really and truly see no difference between words of politicians on both sides over the years concerning political activism on the court and a SITTING US PRESIDENT MAKING THREATS JUST AS DELIBERATIONS BEGIN ?

Please tell me that at least you can see THAT difference !!

And what is President Obama going to do about it if the US Supreme Court overturns Obamacare? It is just the President making noise. There probably will not be very many opening in the Supreme Court in the next 5 years or so.

President Obama knows all too well the problems President Jefferson had with the Federalist judges which created the power of judicial review in the landmark case of Marbury v. Madison. http://millercenter.org/president/jefferson/essays/biography/4

[Guest]

And what is President Obama going to do about it if the US Supreme Court overturns Obamacare? It is just the President making noise. There probably will not be very many opening in the Supreme Court in the next 5 years or so.

Actually, last estimate was maybe THREE in the next years....and so you find it perfectly acceptable for a sitting President to make these kind of remarks just as deliberations start !!

WOW

[Guest]

Actually, last estimate was maybe THREE in the next years....and so you find it perfectly acceptable for a sitting President to make these kind of remarks just as deliberations start !!

WOW

According to whom??

President Obama in a speech today said that the Supreme Court was the final say on Obamacare. This was on Fox News. http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2012/04/03/bloomberg_articlesM1V6UX6K50YK01-M1X28.DTL


"The Supreme Court is the final say on our Constitution and our laws, and all of us have to respect it," President Barack Obama, April 3, 2012.

[Guest]

According to whom??

President Obama in a speech today said that the Supreme Court was the final say on Obamacare.

Look...this is a dumb conversation....you, as with all Obama followers, play with words and would defend him not matter what.

OF COURSE he backed down today and you just blindly ignore what he said yesterday....this is what you followers do...he lies, changes stories and you will back him up no matter what. WOW...to be so indebted to a man and his party is just overwhelming.

This is how we even got to this conversation...he SAID he would address health care costs..HE DID NOT...he said he would address tort reform...HE DID NOT....he said it would be a public forum on this subject...HE DID NOT...he took it to the back rooms and made deals.

YET you blindly forget all that.....I sure hope the card with the D on it gets you something.....to blindly follow this mantra is just, to me, overwhelming.

You totally pass off what he said yesterday because his advisors told him he was wrong and he is out trying to fix it...lo and behold for folks like you he doesnt even have to fix it...makes no difference to you !

[Guest]

FDR did not have a good relationship with the court.

Well that's a surprise....not

Obama's comments were predicted by a number of political pundits who were aware of the liberal democrats plans totry and intimidate certain members of the Supreme Court.

Obama taught Constitutional Law at University of Chicago, but apparently Obama missed teaching Marbury v Madison which was a case laid down by Chief Justice John Marshall defining the doctrine of judicial review. Since 1803the Supreme Court has invaldated parts or all of laws that violated the U.S. Constitution All of these laws were passed by a democratically elected legislature of some kind, either in Congress or in one of the states. And many of them passed with a stronger majority than ObamaCare in which senate managed 60 votes while it passed in the House by only 219-212. WSJ editorial 4/3/12

Obama and his Democratic Senate used every dirty trick and method of intimidation in order to get this 2,700 monstrosity passed and it is coming back to bite him.

Obama's attack on the Supreme Court not only show he is a weak president but a vindictive one who apparently prefers utilizing community organizing tactics rather than honoring the law . Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm

[Guest]

Since completing his first year in office, which for me set the tone and track of his presidency.....talk the talk and never ever walks the walk.

Now three years later I am constantly in the state of disbelief the state of awe he is held in all the while not delivering on what he promises. I do not understand the concept of him not being held accountable by his supporters. Like the WH staff and the media they are committed to continuously try to convince us what he said was not what he really meant or what he did was not the way it appeared or if he does nothing of what he said then they describe what he meant so that again not accomplishing what was said gets a paint or polish job.

For very many of us he has not earned such blind faith. Loyalty has a limit. I do not understand the blind acceptance and defense of Obama's mishandling of the office of POTUS.

As I have said many, many times before in a private enterprise operating on commitment, accountability and performance to commitment he would have not made it a full year on the job let alone three more and currently touting how he has earned four more years. Only if the same number who bought his talk the first time around could possibly get him re-elected. I think he has worn the shine off that star and he will not pull the same vote following in 2012.

I have many friends that are democrats...they have stopped blowing the Obama horn many months ago and quite frankly do not say much at all any more. Hopefully enough are in the same category sufficient to be sure Obama is a one term POTUS....to be more accurate a one term holder of the office of POTUS.

btk

[Guest]

I have asked myself that same question. I have concluded that some folks just seem to lose objectivity.

[Guest]

Opps.

Judges Order Justice Department To Clarify Obama Remarks On Health Law Case | Fox News (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/04/03/judges-order-justice-department-to-clarify-following-obama-remarks-on-health/)