-
The Taxman Cometh (for Tea Partiers)
May 13, 2013 | 150 comments
-
Farrell’s Fallacies
May 9, 2013 | 25 comments
-
Turning on Obama
May 7, 2013 | 227 comments
-
The Pigs of Pigford
April 30, 2013 | 71 comments
-
Overstating Boston
April 26, 2013 | 143 comments
The Obama Watch
Obama’s Officious Opinions
If he thinks they’re helping him politically, he should think again.
On Tuesday afternoon, in a stunning rebuke of President Obama, Judge Jerry Smith of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals decided he had heard enough of the president’s incessant hyper-partisan rhetoric challenging the independence of the federal judiciary. Judge Smith, who was appointed to the court by Ronald Reagan, “referring to statements by the president in the past few days to the effect… that it is somehow inappropriate for what he termed ‘unelected judges’ to strike acts of Congress,” said that Obama’s comments “have troubled a number of people who have read it as somehow a challenge to the federal courts or to their authority…. And that’s not a small matter.”
He then ordered the Justice Department to respond to the court by noon on Thursday with a letter (minimum three pages, single-spaced) explaining with specificity the DOJ’s position on “judicial review, as it relates to the specific statements of the president, in regard to Obamacare and to the authority of the federal courts to review that legislation.” (Audio of the relevant portion of the hearing can be found here [2.7MB], and audio of the full hearing here [29MB].)
*****
My grandmother — and yours — reminded us that if we don’t have anything nice to say, don’t say anything at all. My basketball coach — and yours — reminded us not to give the opposition extra motivation by predicting victory before a game, with the importance of that advice being proportional to the importance of the game.
Barack Obama, already the most overexposed president in American history, could learn from a political version of those bits of wisdom: if you don’t have anything to say that can help you, at least don’t say something that can hurt you, particularly before one of the most important events of your presidency — in this case the Supreme Court’s decision on Obamacare.
The President has made a habit of offering his opinion where it is not only unneeded but also exposes the president to unnecessary political risk.
One might have thought that Obama, our nation’s first or second black president, depending on how you categorize Bill Clinton, would have learned his lesson about jumping into racially-charged kerfuffles after calling Cambridge, Massachusetts police “stupid” for arresting (black) Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates.
But that didn’t stop him from commenting on the Trayvon Martin situation, saying “If I had a son, he’d look like Trayvon” and calling for some national “soul-searching,” again without having any facts beyond what the rest of the nation had read in the newspaper.
On the other hand, no soul searching or response has been forthcoming from Obama despite repeated letters from the parents of two British students who got lost and wandered into a Sarasota, Florida ghetto, only to be executed by Shawn Tyson, a black teenager who saw an opportunity to rob two “crackers” and shot them when they didn’t have money for him.
According to the UK’s Daily Telegraph, a close friend of the murdered tourists made comments after Tyson was sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole: “We would like to publicly express our dissatisfaction at the lack of any public or private message of support or condolence from any American governing body or indeed, President Obama himself. Mr Kouzaris [the father of one of the victims] has written to President Obama on three separate occasions and is yet to even receive the courtesy of a reply. It would perhaps appear that Mr Obama sees no political value in facilitating such a request or that the lives of two British tourists are not worthy of ten minutes of his time.”
This contrast is only possible because Obama volunteered a divisive opinion in the admittedly tragic killing of an unarmed teenage boy.
With Mr. Obama’s advisors probably suggesting he stay out of such racially-tinged controversies, the president’s uncontrollable urge to risk political capital with poorly conceived opinions is funneled elsewhere.
On Monday, the urge caught up with him in a joint press conference with the president of Mexico and the prime minister of Canada in which President Obama said that he was “confident” that the Supreme Court will not overturn his signature piece of legislation — or presumably its keystone individual mandate provision. In fact, he used the word “confident” five times in about two minutes while answering a reporter’s question on the subject — a question that did not include asking the president’s view of the likelihood of any particular Supreme Court decision.
And in a speech on Tuesday (timed, as usual, to focus news cameras on him during a day of important Republican primaries), President Obama reinforced his comments: “I have enormous confidence that in looking at this law, not only is it constitutional but that the Court is going to exercise its jurisprudence carefully.… As a consequence we’re not spending a whole bunch of time planning for contingencies.” He added, “I don’t anticipate the Court striking this down.”
In both speeches, he seemed to be all but daring the Court to fulfill its constitutional responsibilities, suggesting that it would be an overreach of their authority to take the “extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress.” (Not that the size of a majority is relevant to determining constitutionality, but perhaps Barack Obama should be reminded that in a House of Representatives with 78-vote Democrat majority, Obamacare passed by seven votes, garnering not a single Republican and losing 34 Democrats.) As reported above, the Fifth Circuit picked up the president’s gauntlet in most dramatic fashion.
About the Author
Ross Kaminsky is a self-employed trader and investor and is a senior fellow of the Heartland Institute. He is the host of The Ross Kaminsky Show on Denver’s NewsRadio 850 KOA at 11 AM on most Sundays. You can reach Ross by e-mail at rossputin(at)rossputin(dot)com.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (168) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Ross Kaminsky
More Articles From The Obama Watch
http://spectator.org/archives/2012/04/04/obamas-officious-opinions
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Gary B| 4.4.12 @ 7:36AM
Mr. Kaminsky,
Great article. You're right in observing how lucky Republicans are that Obama is providing such excellent campaign material for them. The question is, as always, will the campaign consultants allow Republican candidates (in all racess) actually use these gifts? Or, will they, once again, snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
I read recently that Obama can't win the election, but Republicans can certainly lose it, which is an accurate appraisal of the situation.
Bubba T. | 4.4.12 @ 11:09PM
Let's cut to the chase. Obama's already implied, not in actual word, but rather ... filtered code-speak that "he don't be goin' after no stinkin' white votes. They's not gonna vote for him no way, anyway, so he be goin' to gin-up the minority/welfare mobs and see if he can jam 'da vote with ignorance and mass numbers."
That's all dey is to it. Ain't no 'mo complisatged din dat.
ENOUGH ROPE| 4.5.12 @ 12:28AM
Obama is the most anti-Christ, most anti-American, and most racist American president ever. That should become a superpac campaign slogan.
Months ago, Mark Levin interviewed John Lott (More Guns, Less Crime) who was employed by U Chicago Law School while Obama was there. Per Lott, Obama did not teach constitutional law.
Teaghan| 4.4.12 @ 7:53AM
We can only hope Gary B that Mitt will go for the throat and remind the sheeple daily of who and what is in our White House.
Pete| 4.4.12 @ 10:56AM
He already said that he won't do it.
Gary B| 4.4.12 @ 11:00AM
That worries me, too. This is no time for civility. Or if he won't do it, a few surrogates can do it for him. That's actually better.
Stan Redmond| 4.4.12 @ 8:08PM
All I can hope if Mitt is the nominee is Obama will so bruise Mitt's ego Mitt will lose his temper and start attacking.
Nancy in NC| 4.4.12 @ 7:54AM
The problem, Ross, is that Obama could kill Allen West on K street, and many of his followers would support the action.
I've seen more than a few presidents come and go, but this one has reached an all time low. He's mean spirited, thin skinned, and a liar to boot. If he were not black he couldn't get elected for local dog catcher, but many fear to criticize less they be called the dreaded R word.
If Obama wins this election, I will blame the GOP. One more reason why I refuse to donate to the RNC...they are inept.
oldfart| 4.4.12 @ 8:40AM
One correction - if Mr. Zimmerman is a White Hispanic than Mr. Obama is a White African.
I do agree with you about the RNC - they are a ship of fools fighting with the DNC as to who is best able to steer the ship of state onto the rocks.
Old Soldier| 4.4.12 @ 10:47AM
Except Obama (sans Secret Service) couldn't kill Allen West, ever.
Bob| 4.4.12 @ 1:22PM
That's why they form gangs
Gary B| 4.4.12 @ 11:04AM
The RNC blackmailed Reagan into filling his administration with Bushies, else they wouldn't give him campaign money. This same pressure may be applied to Romney, since it's the establishment that's buoyed him up this far.
Lee Ghume| 4.4.12 @ 1:30PM
Yo Gary B, do see or hear black helicopters buzzing round your neighbourhood?
Gary B| 4.4.12 @ 1:47PM
Not yet... But back on point. Don't you think the Republican establishment will expect something in return for all the money and press Romney is getting, just as Soros is getting a huge return for enabling a Marxist liar to actually get into the White House?
Mike Hawk| 4.4.12 @ 4:16PM
Romney is the Republican Establishment, just as McCain is.
Anthony| 4.4.12 @ 8:05AM
Bravo to the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals for taking the affirmative action law lecturer in Constitutional Law, cum president, to the woodshed.
You grads from the Univ. of Chicago law school who were taught by Obozo should demand your money back.
Can't wait to see how Holder and Obozo put their heads together and write their 3 page missive to the 5th Circuit about Judicial Review.
This president is a churlish, cold-blooded, thin-skinned thug, who has been pampered his entire life by the swooning leftists who saw in Obozo their hopes for black America. (clean and articulate)
So now, when not threatening the Supreme Court, or instructing the media on how to cover his presidency, Obozo can concentrate on his homework assignment given to him by the 5th Circuit.
Query, will the 5th Circuit give Obozo "extra credit" on his homework assignment because, afterall, he is the "one we've been waiting for"?
Yeah right.
Somebody tell Holder, the response must be typed, not written in crayon.
albert constantine jr.| 4.4.12 @ 8:21PM
Don't forget, Biden also "taught" a Constitutional Law course at Widener University Law School. If U of C students get a refund, the POTUS vision of "fairness" should result in these students getting their money back, as well.
Shamus| 4.4.12 @ 8:06AM
Obama is preaching to choir. The average voter is only going to be confused by this drivel.
Philip Johnson| 4.4.12 @ 1:48PM
Unfortunately, Shamus, you are correct. I read with interest the comments posted here and realize that as much as we may be enraged by the obvious political machinations of this President, the vast majority of people in this country know nothing other than what they see as a headline on CNN while walking past the television set at work or school. And since most of the establishment media are in the tank for Obama they always tend to make the President look dashing and commanding, rather than ill-informed and insulting.
Darin| 4.4.12 @ 8:06AM
It doesn't speak well of our political system when we have a President so blatantly unqualified for the position and an opposition party unable to make such an observation understandable to the general public. We have become a nation of mindless sheep who willing enslave ourselves to arrogant narcissists.
O.F. A.N. A.S.S.| 4.4.12 @ 7:34PM
We sheep would like to point out it wasn't mindless sheep who elected the miserable excuse for sheep feces currently in office.
We sheep mind unfavorable comparisons to other species that are unsubstaniated.
We sheep are not mindless that the species sodomization we seek to terminate ironically overwhelmingly occurs from among the same species that elected the miserable excuse for sheep feces currently in office.
Ovines For
A Nation
Absent Species Sodomization
Von Mises Jr.| 4.4.12 @ 8:12AM
I had the distinct pleasure of meeting Dr. Jerome Corsi whom is working with Sheriff Joe Arpaio on challenging ObaMao's eligibility for the Presidency.
It is blatantly clear that there are Agneda21 "One World Government" eliltes such as Frank Marshall Davis, Soros and the senior Ayers that have orchestrated Obama's rise from early childhood. Methinks that the problem is that a half-century of planning for the overthrow of the American Constitution had an unfortunate surprise. Obama is so obnoxious, arrogant and egotistical that he can't sit back and just let it happen. He has to play Mao, or Che as he executed political enemies for folly.
The Congress, both Republican and Democrat establishments have sold out their Oath and the American people. But in the face of a tyrant; Sheriff Arpaio, Dr. Corsi and now the Circuit Court of Appeals have proved that there are still REAL men in America.
So far, it appears that we have real men of principle on the Supreme Court. Their questioning, and perhaps a leaked decision have alerted our Tug-in-Chief that he will not go uncontested in his destruction of the Constitution and American Exceptionalism.
Bravo and kudos from the TEA Party.
JimH| 4.4.12 @ 9:22AM
The One studied the Constitution the way doctors study viruses, with a view to defeating it. Regarding the ‘One World government’ aspects of O’s administration, this weeks’ Economist had an interesting article on the nominations for the head of the World Bank. O’s choice is Jim Yong Kim (no not the new head of North Korea). The Economist comments on Dr. Kim: ‘Mr Kim’s views on development are harder to divine. But what can be gleaned is worrying. In an introduction to a 2000 book called “Dying for Growth”, he wrote that “the quest for growth in GDP and corporate profits has in fact worsened the lives of millions of men and women”, quoted Noam Chomsky and praised Cuba for “prioritising social equity”.
Anthony| 4.4.12 @ 10:11AM
You are your usual eloquent and insightful self, Von.
Human nature being what it is, we humans tend to be cautious and somewhat timid when taking on the stampeding hordes, as was the case with the Obozo phenomenon in '08.
Few brave souls dared challenge the conventional wisdom and the sumani of self congratulation America heaped upon itself for electing its first black president*. (Clinton notwithstanding)
Rush, Mark Levin, the Tea Party, Gov. Palin, Corsi and certainly Sheriff Arpaio were some of the first brave souls taking on the conventional wisdom. And what crap they took, and are still taking for their bravery.
Meanwhile, our "R leaders" in Washington were all hiding in the tall grass. Do you remember McLame, early on in Obozo's term, acting like the apple-polishing school boy during one of Obozo's "break-out sessions" that was to report back to Obozo in 4 hours with a solution to a problem congress haden't solved in decades? I wonder what ever happened to McLame's report back to Obozo?
Slowly, as the brave led on, other folks emerged from hiding, like the Eloi in "The Time Machine".
And now, the cracks in the Obozo edifice are becoming bigger and wider by the day. The Kracon who has seen the head of Medussa is crumbling.
The Fifth Circuit might just be the last crack which will bring the Obozo colossus down, and hopefully, the Supreme Court will add the exclamation point.
As for me, well, as in the final scene of "Night of the Living Dead", when the clean up crews arrive to "dispose" of the last of the wandering zombies, I stand ready with my broom, shovel, and oh yes, my Mossberg, just in case, for the last remaining leftist zombies.
Von Mises Jr.| 4.4.12 @ 10:57AM
My opinion is that ObaMao cannot be re-elected without rampant voter fraud on the scale of Putin's or the little nut job "I'm-on-a-Jihad."
From the esteemed people along with Mr. Corsi, they all seem confident that this will get very ugly as the truth continues to find sunshine. G-d's truth will always win out.
Speculation is that ObaMao will not be the Democrat nominee due to the conglomeration of revelations and controversies amassing against ObaMao. While the idea is welcomed by many, I wonder if the alternative of Hillary might not be more of a threat. She may have a better chance of election than ObaMao, and in reality they are "two peas in a pod" or a distinction without a difference.
Good to speak to you, Anthony.
Gary B| 4.4.12 @ 11:09AM
Hillary would be an ideal fallback, since a woman is second only to a black for the we-are-diverse vote.
Todd S| 4.4.12 @ 11:28AM
Speculation about Obama not getting the Democrat nomination is pointless because it is not going to happen. Even if the Democrats wanted to get rid of him, they would be scared shi#less to take action to do so. Do you know how fast the community organizers and black race hustlers could get riots going if that were to happen? We will have to beat the tyrant at the ballot box. Like you said, there really isn't much of a difference between Obama and Hillary though I do find Obama more dangerous in his willingness to stir up racial politics to an extreme degree. If Obama wins the majority of votes but loses the electoral like happened in 2000, there will be race riots I can almost guarantee and Obama will not lift a finger to stop it.
Von Mises Jr.| 4.4.12 @ 12:23PM
States are organizing ballot challenges to Obama and demanding proof of eligibility. If the conservative states reject Obama on the ballots, the Democrat Party is off the hook. The anger from the race baiters will be directed at the Red States and TEA Party.
DRed| 4.4.12 @ 12:51PM
Good luck with those ballot challenges. How many times do cases challenging Obama's eligibility have to be laughed out of court before you'll give up?
Who, beyond a lunatic fringe of people who believe a non-binding UN resolution is a threat to US sovereignty, are speculating that Obama won't be the democratic nominee? If you haven't noticed, nobody else is on more than a handful of state ballots.
EMOTIONAL PRATTLE ALERT| 4.4.12 @ 3:15PM
Reading emotional prattle offends reason and experience and disgusts intelligence and honesty.
winolet| 4.4.12 @ 2:09PM
Please don't forget Andrew Breitbart in the list who have taken on Obozo!
Anthony| 4.4.12 @ 3:01PM
Quite right, my bad. I can't think of everybody at 9 in the a.m.
Pete| 4.4.12 @ 11:02AM
Well think of it. He was rejected by both his father and mother. He was an only child raised by his grandmother. He never learned to share or accept criticism. He is down deep that lost and lonely boy without a home or country with mentors who dispised America and played on his ego. He is more Caligula than anyone.
Tim the Enchanter| 4.4.12 @ 1:44PM
But- is he going to appoint his horse to the Senate?
BlitheBunny| 4.4.12 @ 2:28PM
Oh Tim, he already has! It's name is Joe Biden!
Anthony| 4.4.12 @ 3:12PM
Caligula, eh? Well, he already ass-backwards appointed his horse's ass from the Senate to be his V.P. and several Supreme Court justices from a similar part of the horse's anatomy.
But anything is possible in a 2nd Obozo term, maybe he'll appoint his golf clubs to be the next NASA administrator, and turn Cape Kennedy into a golf resort.
Hell, it's growing weeds as we speak.
scotchieguy| 4.4.12 @ 2:42PM
Excellent. Why can't the media ever come up with this? Oh yeah, the dreaded R word.
WC| 4.4.12 @ 3:04PM
Many world tyrants, including Hitler and Stalin, had unhappy, lousy childhoods. They were, as was he, seriously psychologically damaged before they became oppressive tyrants.
benny havens| 4.4.12 @ 8:17AM
Andrew is smiling. Obama is self-vetting.
Jackie Dee| 4.4.12 @ 11:37AM
EXCELLENT!!
Gary B| 4.4.12 @ 1:50PM
Second that.
John Daniel| 4.4.12 @ 8:21AM
This president is totally void of grace and completely without class. Tacky, just plain tacky.
Gary B| 4.4.12 @ 1:51PM
So, as head of the Democrat Party, he's perfect.
oldfart| 4.4.12 @ 8:36AM
In the Alinsky playbook there is a phrase that goes something like this: Never let a good crisis go to waste. I don't think Mr. Alinksy's meaning was that if there is no crisis then create one.
Mr. President – this is a case where it is better to keep you mouth shut and be thought a fool than open your pie hole and confirm everyone's suspicions.
Ted R.| 4.4.12 @ 8:53AM
As IF the President is going to take PR advice from his sworn ideological enemies, Kaminsky. The fact of the matter is, that Obama has been FAR more mild-mannered than the likes of you people deserve; that you're squealing in protest when he turns the rhetoric up a notch, is just proof of what left-liberals have been saying all along - he needs to go AFTER you guys.
I find it rich that Kaminsky is one of those squealing, mere days after he penned an article TITLED "Let It Be Political" - in typical Con fashion, he can dish it out, but apparently can't take it.
The Constitutional status of the mandate is in fact debatable, as you Cons would know if you ever left your right-wing echo chamber and looked at the arguments. To find a precedent for the kind of action that striking the law would involve, you have to go back to when my father was born, in the New Deal era. If the Court strikes the law - this same Court that decided the utterly irresponsible Citizens United case (and the same Justices who voted for Bush in 2000) - it will have come out into the open as a nakedly ideological party in American politics. As a liberal, I almost look forward to it happening - because it will give the liberal base a unifying issue to actually get MOBILIZED about. You haven't seen the grassroots left actually organized, for more than 40 years; it has lulled you into thinking that the country is conservative by default. I assure you, you're going to be disabused of that notion.
We won this bill, fair and square - you try to rob us of it, and we'll be back - WITH PREJUDICE.
Sam Vaughn| 4.4.12 @ 9:12AM
Sp0ken like a violence prone Marxist. Fair warning, game on.
Anthony| 4.4.12 @ 10:35AM
Ah, Sam has uncovered one of the last wandering leftist zombies in Ted R.
Well done Sam, the "disposal" crew stands ready to assist.
Teaghan| 4.4.12 @ 12:50PM
Tell it Sam!
Mimi| 4.4.12 @ 9:19AM
The mandate itself was the precedent! When ? Who? would ever make a law forcing anyone to " BUY " anything....your vision of takeover to remake this beautiful NATION will never be fulfilled. Obama will be famous in our history as the first attempt of DICTATORSHIP.
Out of darkness into the LIGHT ! All will be told way into the cracks of this land, The torch of TRUTH will be lit for all to see !
You thought the Country was "RIPE"....Not now, not ever!
Dmac | 4.4.12 @ 9:43AM
Ted,
Your gr0up of liberals is much smaller than you think. It is only because your group , as you put it, "whines" so loudly that you believe your group is larger than it really is.
Wake up, even the main stream media is starting to pull away from your messiah.
The nation has watched the liberals for 40 years now, and what we've discovered about them is as follows:
They won't fight for their country at any cost.
They don't want to work for anything if they think they can have someone else pay for it.
They use professors and elementary school teachers in an attempt to indoctronate our children(the conservatives shall soon respond to this).
They believe that if they believe in it everyone else must abide by it at any cost.
They believe it is okay to destroy the nation tomake a point.
They believe that those who work for what they have should give it up to anyone they deem less fortunate, including the lazy or addicted.
They believe that the United States has no heritage and that morals are not to ever be spoken of as the only moral belief a liberal has is that if it feels good do it.
Ted, we've seen enough of the destruction that liberals do, when if fact, it is liberals who doom our less fortunate to be forever less fortunate. The failed policies of "The Great Nation" must come to an end. The failure of our government to stop recognizing color has in fact only made race relations worse, not better. It is time that liberalism as we know it die this Novemeber.
Ted R.| 4.4.12 @ 10:09AM
Yeah, I've heard it all many, many times already. I find it quite ironic, that you're informing ME that MY side exercises disproportionate influence, because it "whines" - when this EXACTLY describes the conservative coalition known as the 'Tea' Party.
The influence of the left is not felt at the retail level, but instead in our influence over main outlets of the media. The fact is, that that influence is nowhere near as dogmatic as the right supposes. Mainstream liberalism is typically quite pragmatic and fair-minded; as such we tend to handicap ourselves in our fights with you, even when the arguments - and history - are clearly on our side (when it comes to environmental regulation, science, and civil rights).
But if once we start fighting like YOU people fight - and if we come to realize that the Judiciary is rigged against us, we WILL - you will find yourselves getting your metaphorical nose bloodied, and quick.
First, we'll root out the DINO's who are your fellow travelers. If you keep abusing the filibuster, we'll pull the nuclear option on you. If we can put up so much resistance against you, without aggressively competing for public opinion, once we START to, you will not know what hit you.
Lon Mead| 4.4.12 @ 10:23AM
So... you're going to whine louder?
(I like that bit about being on the right side of history, then mentioning civil rights... comedy gold, right there...)
Mimi| 4.4.12 @ 10:46AM
TED....20%...! 20 mealsly %..YOU CAN'T lead the 80% for long!!
Our problems...like health-care can be tinkered with and changed without a National TAKE OVER ! A three page bill could do it! The extreme Leftist - Liberal approach is dead wrong in a free country! The SCOTUS will follow the LAW in the U.S. Constitution...ALL of them, they did not get there without HONOR!
The President is in retreat on this...alarming the ignorance on display...a BIGGIE !
Dmac | 4.4.12 @ 11:57AM
Ted,
Where did you come up with the term "mainstream liberalism"? There is nothing mainstream about liberalism.
Riff Raff| 4.4.12 @ 1:28PM
The squeaky wheel gets the grease, or in your case, the creepy-whiner, hair-trigger-rioter gets the cash.
Mainstream liberalism is pragmatic?! Fair minded?! These statements simply can not be taken seriously. Look around you fool. "Mainstream liberalism" has ruined public schools, made us dependent of foreign energy sources, endangered us in the face of foreign enemies, crippled out economy, disarmed victims and released convicted criminals, and overridden the Constitution and the rule of law, replacing it with administrative mandates and orders. Pragmatic? Fair minded? More like self-serving, greedy, ego-maniacal, destructive, extreme. You are truly a sick person if you believe what you say.
Tim the Enchanter| 4.4.12 @ 1:49PM
I don't believe Ted is sick. Evil is a much better explanation. Sick is something one can do nothing about. Evil is in the will, and these are all willful beliefs on his part.
Louis Jenkins| 4.4.12 @ 9:27AM
Prejudice? Prejudice you say? The left has been mobilized. Look at the media, if they aren't mobilized nothing is. Look at Acorn, look at the auto maker unions, look at the New Black Panther Party, look at the DOJ, look at Democrats who, when considering the bill said "we have to vote on it first to see what's in it." Look at the promises Obama has made to his people. If you guys ain't mobilized by now you never will be. You won the bill by one hair of your mustache, so don't preen and strut around accusing the right of robbery. Go ahead and execute your "plan" of abortion, post and pre, and genecide, arm Obama's private security force that will be equal with the armed services, with Predjudice. For every action there's an equal reaction.
Ted R.| 4.4.12 @ 9:51AM
You're being naive. Today it is conservatives who are the populist party; a century ago, it was the progressives. We fought long and hard against you, and eventually we prevailed in the New Deal.
After the triumph of New Deal liberalism, the Democrat party evolved in the direction of greater social liberalism - hence the Civil Rights and anti-war movements.
The left today is much like the Democratic party - splintered by a kaleidescope of interest groups. You can see this in the Occupy movement. Occupy has the energy, but not the focus. Once the Court comes out as an explicitly right-wing body, the left will turn from trying to persuade the court, to taking on right wing ideology head-on - including attacking the Court. The president is giving you just a taste of what's coming. Imagine what it would have been like, to have a president in office echoing the Tea Party's rhetoric against a Democrat Congress. Switch the parties, and that's what you're gonna get. Believe me, you have forgotten how strong grassroots progressive populism is. You will find out, again.
Riff Raff| 4.4.12 @ 1:31PM
Look Bozo, the "New Deal" is not a triumph. It is a defeat for freedom and economic liberty. The "New Deal" is flatly unconstitutional and your mindless ramblings can not make it constitutional. Perhaps you should READ the constitution. It is also known as the Supreme LAW of the Land, and the US Government has only those powers delegated to it by the States, and among those powers is NOT the "New Deal." Boob.
Louis Jenkins| 4.4.12 @ 3:54PM
If he gets re-elected. Mighty big if. Who is the most naive? Obama or the Tea Party? We know which way the ill wind is blowing. But there's a change in the weather coming. Call the court Right wing? Who is more naive?
Lon Mead| 4.4.12 @ 9:41AM
"...To find a precedent for the kind of action that striking the law would involve, you have to go back to when my father was born, in the New Deal era."
You mean besides:
provisions of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act in 2010?
the Mushroom Promotion, Research and Consumer Information Act in 2001?
the Harbor Maintenance Tax Act in 1998?
the Transfer Act in 1991?
the Copyright Remedy Clarification Act in 1992?
(Just off the top of my head.)
You are right about one thing - the Constitutional status of the mandate IS in fact debatable. It was debated over three days last week to the men and women who will make the final decision (whether you like it or not).
Liberals do need to get motivated... hopefully to elect leaders who know how to write laws that can actually pass Constitutional muster. Until then, they remain a dangerous joke.
Trinacria| 4.4.12 @ 3:21PM
Lon,
You mean to tell me that you're going to use the cheap Conservative trick of using FACTS to support your argument? Don't you see, Lad? You must think with your heart, not your head. Facts and logic simply have no place in the argument; otherwise, you're nothing more than a cold-hearted, mean-spirited, selfish, racist, bigot. The next thing you know, you're making outrageous statements like, "We should learn about the facts of the case before we hang Mr. Zimmerman for shooting Mr. Martin."
Lon Mead| 4.8.12 @ 5:39AM
[hangs head in abject shame]
Sorry. I... I didn't mean to.
Brubaker| 4.4.12 @ 9:52AM
Wow! Ted, you're one scared puppy. Your whole comment reeks of "my dad can beat your dad."
Calvin| 4.4.12 @ 10:01AM
You mean that you will do anything to win. Anything. We already knew that. As far as the liberal base, it is 20% of the country and passed an unpopular and unconstitutional law. The chickens have come home to roost so to speak. You are unsustainable. You can kick and squirm and try to figure a way to lie your way into another victory but your time is almost up. You talk big but just below the surface you are a bunch of crooks with fascist instincts.
Mark MacInnis| 4.4.12 @ 10:02AM
"Fair and square." right...."Deem and Pass" .... "Reconciliation"...."The Cornhusker kickback...." yup. no arm-twisting. No coercion. No bribery. Just good 'ol fashioned, honest, light-of-day transparent politics.
You make me sick. You represent everything thats WRONG with American. What you call American, we call treason. Please just go away.
Liberty4All| 4.4.12 @ 11:31AM
Well Ted, aren't you special. Special Ed, that is. You have learned your drivel well. Have you ever considered thinking for yourself or are you content to have someone else do it for you. I suspect the latter.
Rich Fisher| 4.4.12 @ 12:33PM
I see, so your idea of fair and square is all the back door dealing, bribes and bending of the rules of Congress to get this passed, by one party, is okay? You know, you are more ignorant of the Constitution than is healthy. Could you point to one, just one will do, place in the Constitution that gives the Federal Government the right to force any citizen to purchase a product that they don't want? This is not a political argument, though the Dems turned it into one by ramming and jamming this legislation through, but a Constittutional one. Get out of the Left playbook and give us a cogent response citing the Constitution as your authority. Unless you're smarter than the Solicitor General, or maybe even just a 5th grader, you can't do it. It's not there. The Constitution is there to protect us from this type of corruption at the Federal level and let's hope that the Supreme Court has the guts to say so.
Skippy| 4.4.12 @ 2:35PM
I am wetting my pants in fear.
Oh, wait; I'm not.
tj| 4.4.12 @ 3:49PM
Fair and square my behind.. nothing but vile name calling, closed door demoncrat progressives voted for this pile of horse hocky. 72 Precent of the AMERICAN PEOPLE don't want the damn thing!
And of course you will be back with Prejudice. Say instead of saving some poor family, helping kids in need, helping an elderly couple who is so old with no family, all you want to do is HATE AND DESTROY AND WE ARE SICK OF IT! So we will be on the corner waiting for you cowards!
VOTE EM ALL OUT 2012, 2016, 2020.....
The Bruce| 4.4.12 @ 5:23PM
Ted, I assume your mother hadn't weened you properly?
And as to alluding to the violence that will ensue if liberals don't get there way, I say bring it on. You'll do the same for the Progressive movement what you did to it at the turn of the 20th Century--bury it under a rock for a generation.
The American People writ large are frankly getting tired of your movement. So go ahead and get violent. Show the country (again) what you really are.
Think of it as self-induced (liberal) population reduction.
Bruce| 4.4.12 @ 8:59AM
A lot of people are speculating that the results of the vote have already been provided to the Obama camp. Most feel Obama is ranting because he knows the decision has gone against him. This will have the country up in arms about ranting against the court doing its duty. Here is a scarier thought. The leak is that the SCOTUS will actually UPHOLD Obamacare. This then lets Obama tout that his confidence in the SCOTUS was correctly placed.
Ted R.| 4.4.12 @ 9:14AM
Typical wingnut conspiracy pseudo-thinking. Shouldn't you be out looking for Breitbart's real killer?
Sam Vaughn| 4.4.12 @ 9:17AM
Ted, a lot of us are GDI (independent). You're not helping your cause. Or perhaps you believe what you say.
Dmac | 4.4.12 @ 9:47AM
Ted, or is it Purp?
Riff Raff| 4.4.12 @ 1:32PM
Whoever it is, it is a propaganda machine, churning out pulp nonsense.
R is for Repulsive| 4.4.12 @ 3:21PM
Wait until you get a load of his anti-Christianity pulp nonsense.
Have a puke bucket nearby when you do.
But you have to admit delusionally dishonest and unintelligent liberal idiots like him argue for conservativism very effectively in their own way.
Tim the Enchanter| 4.4.12 @ 1:54PM
(To Ted) Typical leftwing conspiracy pseudo-thinking. Shouldn't you be out looking for Kennedy's real killer? See? I can play too! Putz.
One if by land...| 4.4.12 @ 3:04PM
If we were int he same room Ted I'd know who yours was.
Anthony| 4.4.12 @ 3:27PM
Nope Ted R., haven't you heard, O.J. was in jail the day Andrew died, and Ted Kennedy was dead.
And lord knows, I don't even want to know what sewer Jackson and Sharpton were in that day.
Ah, but perhaps we DO need to find out exactly where the Duke Lacrosse team was, Primo suspects numero uno!!!
Mark MacInnis| 4.4.12 @ 10:06AM
Anyone who doesn't think that Kagan and/or Sotomayor weren't onthe phone to the White House after Friday's session? Really, really naive. Of course Obama knows.
And since they aren't making other plans, what they know is: Kennedy sold us out.
scotchieguy| 4.4.12 @ 2:38PM
Good point. Man, I hope you are wrong. He is a rather cocky little punk, isn't he?
A. C. Santore| 4.4.12 @ 11:05AM
You wrote, "The leak is that the SCOTUS will actually UPHOLD Obamacare. This then lets Obama tout that his confidence in the SCOTUS was correctly placed."
Perhaps I'm more cynical than you, but I would expect him to brag that his pressure caused the Court to bend to his will.
Sam Vaughn| 4.4.12 @ 9:10AM
Narcissitic sociopath.
Maxwell| 4.4.12 @ 9:35AM
And just what happens if Mr. Obama or Mr. Holder does not give a response to the Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit? Is anyone going to go to jail? Why do I have a sinking feeling that Barry will get up and say, this is all backround noise. I have a country to take care of.
Bill| 4.4.12 @ 9:37AM
R-Resolute
O-Organized
M-Mormon
N-Natural
E-Energetic
Y-Young
What is "ROMNEY"!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Todd S| 4.4.12 @ 12:00PM
Stop it please and this is from someone who supports Romney for the most part, it is really juvenile.
One if by land...| 4.4.12 @ 3:05PM
You can copy and paste. Good job little champion. Mommy is proud of you Bill
BlitheBunny| 4.4.12 @ 5:31PM
Romney is not the answer. I really wish the GOP would get their heads out of their butts and present a candidate that won't cause me to have to shower for a week after voting for them.
Nick| 4.5.12 @ 12:21AM
"That nigger lover President Clinton had the pen and vetoed so many good bills passed by the Gingrich-led Congress."
- Written by Bill the Bigot, in the Time for Newt to Do the Honorable Thing thread:
http://spectator.org/archives/.....ent_749403
You're a moron and a racist, Bigot Bill.
GO AWAY!
H Abdullah Shabazz| 4.4.12 @ 9:52AM
A judge's job is to judge cases.
The judge should be given the boot.
A judge has no right to demand an explanation of any statement by any person, political leader or average citizen, about an opinion they expressed on the role of the courts. If nothing else, it has no bearing in the case at hand. The presidnet should ridicule the judge, noting his impotence.
He should instruct his employees to ignore the demand, and insist that the judge withdraw from the case.
Is this guy a dope or a would-be-tyrant? Probably both. Anyhow, a judge who doesnt understand his role should be gonzo. Whether he's a would be tyrant, or just a dope.
This is for sure. Reagan was a goof when he picked this guy.
Lon Mead| 4.4.12 @ 10:09AM
The judge actually does have the right to demand an explanation when a defendant (in this case, the U.S. Government) makes a public statement contrary to known law and precedent. The judge is well within his duties to find out if the defendant intends to follow the court's decision in good faith.
Incidentally, this order was out out by the 5th Circuit unanimously - Judge Smith simply wrote the order.
Rich Fisher| 4.4.12 @ 12:37PM
Excuse me, but the judge is not demanding an explanation of comments about a case that has been decided. He is demanding to know why the White House thinks they have the right to try and influence a judicial decision before it is made. Totally within his rights as a judge to quesion this unacceptable conduct. We need more judges like him.
Dmac | 4.4.12 @ 1:04PM
Maybe since the representative branch of government, mainly our spineless speaker Mr. Boehnor will not stand up to the thug of a President we have, the Judicial branch decided to take a stand and rightfully so. The court has every right to ask the Executive branch if it believes the Judicial branch has a constitutional right to judge the case based on its constitutionality and not just because the Executive branch says it must be so.
The Presidents comments were a direct assault on the court. A court appointed legally and approved by the Congress. Therefore the Presidents assault was also gainst the Congress and therefore against the citizens of the United States whom the Congress represents.
Yes, the court not only had the right, it had the duty as the court is sworn to uphold and defend the Constituion of the United States. What this judge did was to let the Executive branch know that the courts have every intention of defending the Constitution of the United States.
Anthony| 4.4.12 @ 3:48PM
Shabazz my man, You sure as hell have never been inside a courtroom, and you sure as hell have never argued a case in front of a judge, Appellate, or Supreme Court, unless you practice in your underwear when Judge Judy is on T.V.
However, you might just be a Ivy League trained lawyer like Obozo, Holder, and the Solicitor General, so I'll cut you some slack here.
The 5th Circuit Court of Appeals has an ABSOLUTE right to discern the position of the Obozo Justice Department when it comes to its position on Judicial Review, especially since Holder's Injustice Department will soon argue before the Supreme Court to hold the Defense of Marriage legislation unconstitutional. Oops!!!
Now, when Judge Judy comes on today, stand straight, have your underwear on backwards, in order to avoid any embarassing moments, and say in a loud, clear, distinct voice, "may it please the court"!!!
There!! you already outdid the Solicitor General!!!
strumndrang| 4.8.12 @ 2:28AM
Think before you speak. Shit-for-brains.
W| 4.4.12 @ 10:01AM
While I am not a fan of Obama, did not and will not vote for him, I don't have a problem with the comments on the Supreme Court, but I have a problem with him commenting because it is so hypocritical.
The Dems have used the Supreme Court to declare unconstitutional state and federal laws that they knew would not be overturned by the Congress or state legislatures. The most notable examples are the state abortion statutes and state marriage laws.
Conservatives have always questioned the Court's role in ignoring the will of the legislatures and Congress to find rights in the Constitution under emanations from penumbras to strike down state laws.
Now Obama believes, probably from a tip from Kagan, that the initial vote by the Court following the oral arguments is to strike down his Obamacare. So he is pouting that the Court just can't ignore the 219 to 212 vote in the House on a bill nobody read, and the phony reconciliatin vote in the Senate. He views this as an overwhelming mandate that the Court should not ignore. If the Court is to judge by the popular wil then maybe the Court should then look at the polls that show over 60% of the public wants Obamacare repealed .
Mark MacInnis| 4.4.12 @ 10:08AM
In my most pleasant dreams, some day, the Supreme Court is presiding at an impeachment of this Fraud in Chief....
What a karma b*tch slap that would be, eh?
Dmac | 4.4.12 @ 1:06PM
In my dreams the Supreme Court is has just denied Obama's appeal before he goes before a firing squad for treason and other high crimes.
One if by land...| 4.4.12 @ 3:06PM
What does it mean that we share a common dream?!?
Dmac | 4.4.12 @ 3:21PM
It means we both believe in the Constitution of the United States my friend.
Mike 3/505| 4.4.12 @ 10:16AM
Ross,
Nicely Done. You are hereby forgiven for yesterday's flaccid description of Obama's narcissism. :-)
Regards,
Mike
Ross Kaminsky | 4.4.12 @ 10:19AM
Thanks, Mike. I aim to please! (Except when I don't...)
Mike 3/505| 4.4.12 @ 10:22AM
LOL
Ross Kaminsky | 4.4.12 @ 10:26AM
You may not be surprised to hear that the NY Times web page has no mention of Judge Smith's scolding of the administration yesterday...
Pete| 4.4.12 @ 10:29AM
Or about the 50yr old white man beaten with hammers by two black teens just a few miles from where the Trayvon incident took place.
Anthony| 4.4.12 @ 4:23PM
Ross, are you suprised? Did you hear about MoDo's rant?
I swear, the folks working for the Times need to be drug tested upon entry of the building each day.
Pete| 4.4.12 @ 10:27AM
Does anyone doubt that behind the scenes, Kennedy and Roberts are being threatened, bribed and blackmailed by this administration's Chicago style henchmen? They and their loved ones ought to be in witness protection programs up until the final vote.
Thom| 4.4.12 @ 11:47AM
The witness protection program works like Hotel California
Cuffs| 4.4.12 @ 10:31AM
Impeachment sounds pretty good to me.
Thom| 4.4.12 @ 10:38AM
Narcissists with the deep rooted inferiority complex pathology our current King Obama has can’t help themselves…. They aren’t fit for “command’ and more and more of the mental disorder underlying all this will keep revealing itself as more and more pressure is applied to the self-absorbed portrait he has of his self-image. There are serious underlying problems in this man’s world view that will continue to place this nation at risk for some serious external buffoonery or difficult internal problems he either fan the flames of or is incapable of dealing with in an adult fashion.
Ross Kaminsky | 4.4.12 @ 10:42AM
By the way: Some people are suggesting a conspiracy theory along the lines that there has been a leak from the office of one of the liberal judges telling Obama that he can confidently go after the Court because his law is safe.
I would bet a lot of money against that being the case.
Pete| 4.4.12 @ 11:06AM
You would lose. The Chicago Democratic Machine, which Obama brought with him to the White House is a conspiracy. It has infected the entire Democratic Party. Its the carrot and its the stick. Obama hand picked two of his conspirators for the Supreme Court. We have Media Matters sending White House talking points to the Main Stream Media and we have reporters who tweet each other continuously keeping everyone in the group think.
Don't be naive. Everything goes through the White House.
Alan| 4.4.12 @ 11:14AM
Regardless of what the vote was, there is no doubt in my mind that he KNOWS what the vote was and he knew it very soon after it was taken. I don't think he would go after the Justices if he knew his bill was safe. The vote is subjected to change and its not cast in stone. Further antagonizing the people who are up in the air or subject to changing doesn't help his cause. If one thing, the marxist is predictable, he goes after what gets in his way or dares to stop his Long March with the usual attacks. Narcissists like him are pretty predictable. If the vote was in the bag for him, he be preening and mentally masturbating himself, he just couldn't help it. He knows this pile is in trouble. Some are giving him more credit for being smarter than he is, he isn't. He's setting himself up for being the wounded warrior who fought for the Healthcare of the masses and was wronged by the Evil Justices who are taking it away and are now responsible for the deaths of millions he tried to save. Nothing new.
kwan| 4.4.12 @ 11:46AM
That's right Kagan must of run to the nearest phone as fast as her little legs would carry her to inform Obama that ObamaCare was heading for the dustbin of history. Now in panic mode the little tin-pot dictator Obama is firing off threats and bombast as he sees the wheels coming off his Bolshevik Revolution.
J. Moses Browning| 4.4.12 @ 11:50AM
I don't believe the Court will wait till June. I wouldn't be at all surprised to see an opinion before April is out.
Oldefarte| 4.4.12 @ 12:16PM
Ross, great thoughts....thanks! Now if you could possibly succeed in convincing other fellow TAS writers to cease or refrain from editorializing exclusively regarding Rick Santorum. Oh well, probably impossible, just as it is to with the asinine actions of this faux-president. It's not so much of what he does and says, but rather that survey after survey poll indicate that he and the Republican presumed candidate [Romney or whichever other] are closely tied in the public's opinions. Why are people so STUPID? Why was he elected in 2008? Why do they not understand his nature, his philosophy, his personae after his three years in office and now after the huge number of documentated evidence from editorials such as Ross' and many, many others? WHY? It not that he does or says these things, but rather that the public are apparently so lacking in basic common sense as to not be able to understand same. That is what is simply amazing to me, and I'll go to my grave shaking my head in disbelief and astonishment at this supreme ignorance!!!!!!!!
scotchieguy| 4.4.12 @ 2:55PM
Maybe the old saying is true, we get the leaders we deserve. Or maybe it is just white guilt.
Oldefarte| 4.4.12 @ 8:42PM
[Being a Irish Whiskey guy myself] That makes TWO OF US THAT GET IT, but why can't the rest of them understand? I mean [as an example], Jews support him by 80% when he's doing everything possible to destroy Israel. I just don't understand WHY?????????
Rich Fisher| 4.4.12 @ 12:47PM
The hypocrisy of Obama and the Left is just stunning. He complains about unelected officials making decision that affect the rest of us while his own administration is filled with just such officials. Wonder why we have so many Czars? Because, they could not get through a confirmation hearing to be an official
Cabinet member. Obama has fine tuned the appointment of officials with no accountability to anyone but him to an art form. While you morons on the Left complain about the tax deductions that Big Oil gets another one of your precious Green companies went down the tubes again yesterday, sucking another 2billion plus in loan guarantees from the Feds. How much is that now that Obama contributors have gotten in loan guarantees and then gone bankrupt? $10 billion? $20? Do you care?
Pete| 4.4.12 @ 1:00PM
These "green" investments are nothing but payoffs and thinly disguised money laundering to put taxpayer money back into OdumbO's campaign. Win or lose come November, that arrogant sack of feces will be laughing at and living off the American people while smoking doobies for the rest of his life.
Dmac | 4.4.12 @ 1:11PM
Pete,
it probably wouldn't surprise you to know that a percentage of most foreign aid is also used for kickbacks and bribes and thats why "We the People" can't seem to get out government to stop sending OUR money to every little po-dunk nation on Earth.
Pete| 4.4.12 @ 1:41PM
Nope, it wouldn't and it doesn't. That is the primary reason for the UN's existence and why OdumbO is such a fan.
Konnie| 4.4.12 @ 2:37PM
I also read yesterday that O has once again disabled the mechanism to determine where his donations come from, (as in overseas) as he did in the last election.
Frediano| 4.4.12 @ 2:26PM
The politics of Obama's comments aimed at the court were very clear:
1] He has concluded that the USSC is very likely to go against him, and is making no attempt to aim his comments at them, politically(where politics is defined as 'the art and science of getting what we want from others.' Clearly, what he is going to get from the USSC is a giant middle finger as a reaction to his petulance.)
2] His comments are clearly pre-emptory remarks aimed at that fraction of the electorate that he is pandering to, trying to eke out a 51%/49% skin of teeth margin in Nov. They are the act of a desperate man who believes he can change democracy in this nation and politically nullify the court to get what he wants. These are the actions of a tyrant.
Purp| 4.4.12 @ 2:52PM
It's amazing the concern you have for President Obama. You are coaching him on how to be less damaging to him politically - I never thought you would be interested in helping this President.
I suspect you have a different agenda.
This President has shown that he doesn't do what is politically expedient, although he is a politician, and, OMG, he might have political motives. Really, I'm shocked, shocked I tell you.
The Congress has the power to enact Obamacare, just like they did Medicare, Social Security, Airline regulation, Telecom regulation etc. under the Commerce Clause, Article I, Section 8 of the US Constitution which says "the Congress shall have the power to regulate Commerce ... among the several states ... to make ALL laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers ... " Today, insurance is regulated by the states .. The Affordable Care Act will regulate the healthcare insurance among the States through the Federal Government. The Individual mandate is different - it is a Republican idea to bring personal responsibility to bear in the healthcare arena. Spreading costs and risks amongst those that already pay and don't pay now for insurance - making it cheaper for everyone ultimately. Since For-profit Insurance companies actually run the insurance plans - look to them if you think it might be too expensive.
I prefer Medicare for all - cutting out the profit motive, automatically is cheaper for us all.
Trinacria| 4.4.12 @ 3:58PM
I hasten to note that Mr. Kaminsky suggested political motives as only one of several possible explainations from Obama's comments.
Personally, I think it's rather generous of Mr. Kaminsky to attribute his comments to possible political motives. It's not that I don't believe Obama wouldn't stoop to any low to advance his own cause; I simply don't think he's thought it through that thoroughly. His comments are reactionary; they're not well thought out and finely crafted messages designed to achieve a specific objective (the fact that they may indeed have that effect notwithstanding).
Obama is at heart a radical community organizer - nothing more, nothing less. He views the world through the lense of persecution and discrimination; when he sees something that reinforces his world view, he reacts instictively and lashes out - he just can't help himself. I even find myself on occassion feeling embarrassed for him; there's actually something profoundly uncomfortable about watching a man so carelessly revealing himself to the world as small, unserious, and inadequate. Then again, when citizens fail to take seriously their reponsibility to consider the qualifications of those for whom they cast their vote, I suppose they get what they deserve.
From the Desk of Media Matters| 4.4.12 @ 5:00PM
Pierre-Barracina Rachel-Linda Greenhouse-Hussein Maddow-Pelosi,
Even MM staff finds themselves on occasion feeling that the embarrassment and discredit you Penelope-Maxine bring to yourself in addition to our organization is cause to ponder uncomfortably how truly small and unserious and inadequate you Penelope-Jacqueline in reality really are as your words self-evidently reveal on a daily basis.
Then again, you Penelope-Kathleen could take seriously intelligence and honesty, reason and experience, integrity and credibility, as a responsible member of the human race.
Stop getting what you deserve.
- MM staff
Trinacria| 4.4.12 @ 8:30PM
Never before in the history of human discourse has an argument been so exquisitely crafted. The eloquence with which you state your position is exceeded only by the sheer brilliance of the argument itself. Indeed, who among us would have had the creative genius to employ the use of random words, carefully placed one after the other with no apparent connection between them, to illustrate the unassailable merits of one's argument? Bravo, sport. Well done!
Now run along and fetch me a Slurpee...
From the Desk of Media Matters| 4.4.12 @ 11:50PM
Dear Sir,
MM staff has been thoroughly embarrassed and discredited by our bottom rung MM mindless retarded parrots to the point MM staff is on the verge of switching sides.
MM staff in addition has been thoroughly humiliated by Obama and Pelosi and their sycophants which has led MM staff to begin seeing the light.
MM staff is confused by your post in response to our attempt to rein in our most stupid lying bottom rung MM mindless retarded idiot parrot and biggest discredited embarrassment Penelope-Pink.
MM staff wishes to point out the words used were cribbed from your very own - which was meant as a tribute to your post which had served to help us see the light and contemplate switching sides.
- MM staff is shaken the side MM staff has been contemplating switching to has not discerned the intent of a post merely because it is positioned poorly in the thread.
- MM staff has many bottom rung MM mindless retarded parrots to fetch for us and other perks that MM staff has been willing to forego in order to get away from their abject stupidity up until now.
Sincerely,
- MM staff
Oldefarte| 4.4.12 @ 8:58PM
Wrong, Purp! Universal population-citizen governmental programs CAN BE a good thing, and mostly SS and Medicare was/is [although both need financial tweeking to remain solvent]. However WELFARECARE is simply that as it is a brazen, trojun-horsed attempt by Democrats to shift governmental health insurance protection from Medicare to this WELFARECARE, and to destroy the former in the process. Why is that bad? Simple because it's a political maneuver to garner the votes of the younger, more healthy members of our society to the benefit of the Democratic Party. Medicare recipients PAY FOR their coverage throughout their lifetime of work through payroll deductions, and are unable to receive this benefit until reaching the retirement age of 65-67 mostly. WELFARECARE's recipients will instantly become qualified to become recipients, even though they have not PAID FOR THROUGH A LIFETIME OF PAYROLL DEDUCTIONS THE PEMIUMS FOR SAME. So Obama/Democrats are eliminating Medicare [for seniors who have paid for their coverage] and replacing it with WELFARECARE [for twenty-year olds plus who have not paid for same and never will]. As such it is as I describe purely health WELFARE. That's why it is a bad thing that need to be defeated/outlawed, and if the welfare class needs healthcare, then they should pay for same themselves by working for an company with group health coverage or purchasing an individual policy. The taxpayers of this country are having to fund enough welfare through governmental mandates, and they don't need additional welfare being forced upon them!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Purp| 4.4.12 @ 9:47PM
How amazing that a government welfare program is run mainly by for-profit insurance and pharmaceutical companies. Medicare is government run, the Affordable Care Act is simply regulating insurance at the Federal level. Do you understand the difference?
From the Desk of Media Matters| 4.5.12 @ 2:40PM
Penelope-Pink Pansy-Putz Pierre-Pelosi,
MM staff finds themselves on this occasion feeling the need to remind you Penelope-Puke that you Penelope-Punk continually demonstrate you Penelope-Pathetic do not understand the difference between liberty and tyranny.
Stop embarrassing and discrediting the human race.
- MM staff
Dmac | 4.4.12 @ 3:27PM
Perp,
Good morning, err, I mean good afternoon. Just woke up huh? Good thing your un-employed and just waiting on the mailman to deliver your check. Oh, you're welcome. I don't mind getting up early eve4ryday, going to work whether I feel like it or not to make sure I'm able to give the government whats mine so you can have whats mine too. Now go back to bed, those of us that actually pay the bills will take care of Obama and the Congress for you. but start looking for a job, because in 2013 many on the free ride ticket will be excluded from it.
Purp| 4.4.12 @ 5:28PM
Not that is't any of your business, but I was on lunch - but why are YOU so late in the day?
I don't need no one to support me - I do just fine on my own.
The sooner you give up the "freeloaders are the reason we pay taxes" mentality the better off this country will be.
It's insulting to a lot of hard-working, but low paid Americans that holier than though attitude you have.
And, no I'm not low paid, but I don't mind sharing the bounty the Lord has provided to me - perhaps that's why I have more than most. Maybe I'm hard-working, maybe I'm brilliant, maybe I have a good education or I'm just lucky. In any case, I'm not selfish or self-centered, bigoted or racist, un-American or un-Christian.
I just prefer to live in a country where other people matter, community is important and we watch out for each other - including through government programs.
Not that government people know everything, but without them, we have unsafe water, unclean air, elderly scrabbling for scraps, the sick or disabled on their own - basically China. No thanks.
Curtis Rasmussen| 4.4.12 @ 6:24PM
Wrong. More like China.
My family gives to charity, even though we do without. You? You would have the government forcibly remove me from my hard-earned money to fund your community (socialist, more like China) programs, whether I believe in them or not. No thanks.
And it is Dmac's business, since it's his money you so graciously accept and squander.
No need to reply, you predictably inept apparatchik. We already know your emotionally driven fallacious retort.
Purp| 4.4.12 @ 9:55PM
Actually, since you obviously are no Christian - you owe taxes to the government, period. " Give unto Caesar that which is Caesar's" - ring any bells? There's a big difference between a socialist government and a benevolent civilization.
No one is advocating nationalizing industries, least of all me - your "socialist" crap is simply your dittohead talking points, since you've been told to think and say what you do.
You just love what government provides to you, you just can stand having to pay for it - that's too bad, so sad. You have to pay up - it's a matter of whether you pay Wall Street or Grandma and the kids.
Do you really think you won't be paying, and paying dearly under Rep. Paul Ryan/Richie Romney's budget plan? Seriously?
Curtis Rasmussen| 4.4.12 @ 10:50PM
I never mentioned any religion, nor have I ever mentioned Rush, nor do I want the government to interfere in my life to the extent that it does already beyond its enumerated powers, nor did I mention any of the politicians that you vomit forth, nor did I mention Wall Street, nor am I implying any of your prattle, you straw man dipshit.
From the Desk of Media Matters| 4.4.12 @ 11:15PM
Penelope-Putz Pansy-Purp Punk-Pelosi,
MM staff finds themselves on this occasion feeling the impending election rout of Obama and embarrassing end to the thoroughly discredited progressive liberal ideology has caused you to become completely unhinged.
MM staff feels this way because your separate personalities are blurring.
MM staff feels they are well enough acquainted with your separate personalities over the years to note your Penelope Purp persona is reading more like your Fiscal fckewe persona as you've become unhinged.
MM staff feels it necessary to remind you your 1%er in Mensa persona is Fiscal fckewe not your Penelope Purp persona.
Stop becoming unhinged while you are discrediting and embarrassing us.
- MM staff
From the Desk of Media Matters| 4.4.12 @ 6:40PM
Penelope-Jacqueline Rachel-Penelope Penelope-Penelope Pelosi-Maddow Moscow-Pelosi Pelosi-Pelosi,
MM staff finds themselves on this occasion feeling the embarrassment and discredit your failure to take seriously your responsibility as a member of the human race to hold as self-evident truth our endowed unalienable rights including life and liberty and pursuit of happiness.
MM staff finds themselves on this occasion feeling the inevitable consequences your intentional oppression of everyone else's self-evident true unalienable rights will bring upon yourself will be solely of your own making as you get what you deserve.
Stop being beyond hope and change and transformation.
- MM staff
albert constantine jr.| 4.4.12 @ 8:36PM
"I don't need no one to support me "
Purp;
Regarding the choices you gave for your bounty:
1)Maybe I'm hard-working,
2) maybe I'm brilliant,
3) maybe I have a good education
4) or I'm just lucky
Your use of the double negative above tends to support the notion that neither 2) nor 3) are the correct answer.
Purp| 4.4.12 @ 9:58PM
What u mean boy- u ain't hardly got no reason in you? You never leave a typo behind do you? You freakin' moron that's all you got?
Nevertheless, I make more than you will ever make, so lucky is good enough for me.
From the Desk of Media Matters| 4.5.12 @ 2:52PM
Penelope-Putz Penelope-Pansy Penelope-Pink Penelope-Pelosi,
Even our other bottom rung MM mindless retarded parrots disgusted with being associated with you have pointed out to MM staff you Penelope-Puke cannot possibly know how much other commenters earn therefore the statement "I make more than you will ever make" is obviously a bald-faced lie.
Even our other bottom rung MM mindless retarded parrots are ashamed with themselves that they have previously failed to perceive all your statements are lies as obvious as "I make more than you will ever make".
Even our other bottom rung MM mindless retarded parrots acknowledge every conservative commenter at this site has perceived your obvious lies all along.
Even our other bottom rung MM mindless retarded parrots insist you stop embarrassing and discrediting the human race.
- MM staff
Oldefarte| 4.4.12 @ 9:09PM
Purp, You and other socialist Democrats don't seem to understand or to honestly acknowledge the true meaning of charity [it begins at home etc]. If an individual wishes to GIVE to another [charity] and to support same, then they will no doubt receive their reward for doing thus in heaven or the next life [after death], but it's an individual choice as to whether or not that person GIVES or DOES NOT GIVE, since if salvation in the afterlife is dependent upon such charity, then it should be up to the individual to CHOOSE TO GIVE. What alternatively happens through governmental welfare is that the individual if FORCED BY THE LEGAL WEIGHT OF THE GOVERNMENT TO GIVE WHETHER THEY WANT TO DO SO OR NOT. Forced to give....get it? No choice....get it ? The government should not be allowed to FORCE IT CITIZENS TO GIVE TO CHARITY OR TO FUND/APY FOR OTHERS' WELFARE but that is exactly what is happening through programs such as WELFARECARE. If a non-giving individual ends up going to hades in afterlife, that is the result of his un-charitable non-giving, so he individually pays for his selfishness as you say. Again for the government to force by law charity is morally corrupt and unjustified!!!!!!!!!!!!
Mike Hawk| 4.4.12 @ 9:20PM
I would suggest Purp emigrate to China or Cuba. He won't have wait for paradise on earth. All his needs will be met and he will have everything for free.
Purp| 4.4.12 @ 10:04PM
I don't need anything free - what about you freeloader? You get plenty free you don't pay for - you just don't admit it.
EMOTIONAL PRATTLE ALERT| 4.4.12 @ 11:03PM
Reading emotional prattle offends reason and experience and digusts intelligence and honesty
Purp| 4.6.12 @ 9:26AM
But the truth hurts, doesn't it? it should offend.
PAIN-FREE PRATTLER ALERT| 4.9.12 @ 1:41PM
Reading emotional prattle reveals the prattlers are oblivious to the truth and therefore the disgusting offensiveness of their prattle.
TruSkeptik| 4.4.12 @ 4:37PM
These are actions, and indeed, the reactions of one who has never had to work and survive in the "real world". Only a neophyte would make strategic errors of this relative simplicity. Unless, of course, Mr. Obama has something entirely different in mind . . . .
ABNCP| 4.4.12 @ 5:54PM
Well Holder had Obana's stupidity shoved up one of largest orifices today. How does it feel Holder? Oh, of course you should be used to that feeling by now. Whenever this President gives a speech or talks on any media about politics, he spouts misinformation, disinformation, half truths or dammed lies. His entire Presidency can be described as, "a term designed by and idiot, full of sound and fury and signifying nothing of value."
Thank you Macbeth and sorry for the paraphrasing Mr. Shakespeare.
obadiah| 4.4.12 @ 8:08PM
Obama and the democrats are hyenas tearing chunks out of the carcass of the American Republic. Outrageous. That carcass belongs to the republican buzzards.
DRed| 4.4.12 @ 8:16PM
So, Ross, Intrade has Obama at about 60% to win the presidential election. Have you put your money where your mouth is?
DeRp| 4.5.12 @ 12:22AM
Obama - Biden 2008:
Hope and Change
Obama - Biden 2012:
Despair and Static
DeRp DeRp DeRp
DeRp? DeRp?| 4.5.12 @ 3:56PM
Obama Sin Biden '12
Despair and Static
DeRp! DeRp! DeRp!
jeff perren| 4.4.12 @ 8:19PM
" low approval ratings"
In an otherwise unimpeachable article, I found this jarring. I wish it were true, but last time I checked (about two days ago) he was still hovering in the high 40s.
albert constantine jr.| 4.4.12 @ 8:39PM
"neither truth nor common sense nor dignity will stay his hyper-partisan rhetoric from the swift completion of its appointed rounds."
Ross;
I must tip my cap to you for that excellent line in an inspired article.
k. bourg| 4.4.12 @ 9:47PM
Ross, I think what he's doing is rather obvious. By pretending to be totally confident in the Supreme Court's decision, he will be able to claim the he is shocked, SHOCKED I TELL YOU!!! when they strike down his ridiculous mandate. It will make it easier to say that the decision was pure politics and thereby incite his base who are too stupid to realize that the mandate isn't even close to being constitutional. Obama never says what he means, ever.
Owen K| 4.5.12 @ 2:10AM
This is what a narcissist does. He can't help himself. And, in my humble opinion, the more he continues to do this, the better the chances of him loosing in November. Then, we can get a real President in office instead of a would be dictator.
Brian Richard Allen | 4.5.12 @ 2:36PM
.... Zero added that he didn't expect that the SCOTUS would strike down Soros's signature power grab ....
TRANSLATION: Kagan called and told me it's 7:2 history and that I have until that's made official to incite Hitler's helper Herr Soros's and Media Matters' and my mindless Untermenschen and to create as much dissent as is possible in whatever else is Left of my base with a view to them all rioting when the court throws Romney .. um Obamacare into the trash!
Rick| 4.5.12 @ 4:51PM
Obamas' polices do to work its just headwins. He will NOT loose! Your a bigget and your poles are rasist!
kate| 4.5.12 @ 7:10PM
I would say respectfully to Justice Kagen that she should have recused herself. Difficult, I understand, but the correct thing to do.
kate| 4.5.12 @ 7:13PM
(because of some of her communications after the healthcare bill passed...) Google it. I say this with regret and sadness at the unconstitutional behavior occurring in the country at this time. We need to be one nation.
realfactchecker| 4.6.12 @ 6:49AM
"neither truth nor common sense nor dignity will stay his hyper-partisan rhetoric from the swift completion of its appointed rounds."
Albert's right. That was SO GOOD! Did you really author that sentence? I printed it and taped it on my wall.
I agree with some of the other comments - Kagan leaked the results of the Supremes' first vote to Barack. He tore himself away from his mirror to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat..again - just like he did for the Olympic bid for Chicago.
Personally, I wish he would stick to golf.
Goldwaterite| 4.6.12 @ 7:17PM
TO: Ross et al.
For those of you who still dissent from the Dear Leader in any way, a "queen of mean" has a message for you:
“We have an African American president who has been assailed, not because of his mostly moderate politics, but because he happens to be of African descent.” ---Julianne Malveaux (04/05/12) The Madison Times
Mike Eryvin| 4.7.12 @ 3:11AM
Why do Obama's current comments and gaffs give me an eerie foreboding, that he is purposely sabotaging his reelection campaign to enable the election of an even worse Non-Choice in Mitt Romney?
Mike Eryvin| 4.7.12 @ 3:33AM
Why do Obama's current comments and gaffs give me an eerie foreboding, that he is purposely sabotaging his reelection campaign to enable the election of an even worse Non-Choice in Mitt Romney?