Originally Posted by Taltarzac725

Only when the Republicans want that definition of "activist judges" to apply though. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/24/us...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.

Originally Posted by Taltarzac725

Only when the Republicans want that definition of "activist judges" to apply though. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/24/us...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 !!

Originally Posted by Bucco

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/je...ys/biography/4

Originally Posted by Taltarzac725

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

Originally Posted by Bucco

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/articl...YK01-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.

Originally Posted by Taltarzac725

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 !

Originally Posted by waynet

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

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

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

Opps.

Judges Order Justice Department To Clarify Obama Remarks On Health Law Case | Fox News