Tag Archive: Supreme Court


Barak is the gift that keeps on giving . Truely , he is the libertarian’s best friend . Everything that he speaks out against instantly becomes that much more popular . You gotta love it .

In fact, a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that twice as many–30%– believe the Supreme Court does not limit the government enough.
Forty percent (40%) say the balance is about right, while 15% more are undecided.
(To see survey question wording, click
here.)

Posted by John Galt

The Tinpot Dictator of DC .

“His comments about
the Supreme Court, when combined
with his astonishingly dishonest attack
on the House GOP budget ( see here for
more), portray a president who is living
in a fantasy world — a place where
facts and history are inverted, lies
become truth, where everything is
subordinated to ambition and you
simply make things up as you go along.
Nietzsche referred to this mindset as
the “will to power.” In American politics
it’s known as The Chicago Way.”
Peter Wehner

I have a feeling this is just the beginning . The narcissm and arrogance of the man allow no dissent , nor do they facilitate the practice of hiring and ( here is the key ) listening to experts than actually know how to get things done .
The ” I know better ” condescending attitude that pervades the left in general has found it’s favorite son in Obama .
Having ridden the affirmative action/pc/liberal guilt wagon all the way to the top of the gravy train he’s never been challenged  , never had to demonstrate any tangible competency and basically never been told ” you’re wrong ” .
Spending your life surrounded by guilt wracked , sycophantic , toadying white liberals  might well distort anyone’s world view and give one a somewhat inflated sense of self worth . Odds are that all of you know such people . Obama is just so …. in extremis .

Posted by John Galt

It’s all politics all the time with this clown . He wouldn’t know the right thing to do if it crawled up and bit him on the Biden ass .

Posted by John Galt

If the
policy of the government upon vital questions
affecting the whole people is to be irrevocably
fixed by decisions of the Supreme Court,” wrote
Abraham Lincoln, “the people will have ceased to
be their own rulers.”

Right now it seems as if we are the “ruled” not the rulers .

Posted by John Galt

THE NEW YORK SUN: Ex Parte Obama.Liar in Chief
It’s been a long time since we’ve heard
a presidential demarche as
outrageous as President Obama’s
warning to the Supreme Court not to
overturn Obamacare. The president
made the remarks at a press
conference with the leaders of Mexico
and Canada. It was an attack on the
court’s standing and even its integrity
in a backhanded way that is typically
Obamanian. For starters the president
expressed confidence that the Court
would “not take what would be an
unprecedented, extraordinary step of
overturning a law that was passed by
a strong majority of a democratically
elected Congress.” . . .
It is outrageous enough that the
president’s protest was inaccurate.
What in the world is he talking about
when he asserts the law was passed by
“a strong majority of a democratically
elected Congress”? The Patient
Protection and Affordable Health Care
Act barely squeaked through the
Congress. In the Senate it escaped a
filibuster by but a hair. The vote was
so tight in the house — 219 to 212 —
that the leadership went through
byzantine maneuvers to get the
measure to the president’s desk. No
Republicans voted for it when it came
up in the House, and the drive to
repeal the measure began the day
after Mr. Obama signed the measure.
It is the aspersions the President cast
on the Supreme Court, though, that
take the cake. We speak of the libel
about the court being an “unelected
group of people” who might
“somehow overturn a duly constituted
and passed law.” This libel was dealt
with more than two centuries ago in
the newspaper column known as 78
Federalist and written by Alexander
Hamilton.
Obama must be expecting to lose. Because
if he wins, this kind of threat will simply
allow people on the right to argue that the
Supreme Court’s decision was the result of
intimidation, and deserves no deference by
a new Supreme Court. And how will
Obama’s feminist supporters feel, given
that those all-important abortion and
birth-control decisions also came from an
“unelected” Supreme Court?
And if I were a Republican member of
Congress I’d immediately introduce a
proposed Constitutional amendment to
elect all future Supreme Court justices in a
national vote, with no input from the
President. Just for fun . . . .
Posted at 3:16 am by Glenn Reynolds

Pardon me Professor , but this needed to be posted in full . Thank you .

Posted by John Galt