How not to win friends and influence people

Today, in a speech from the White House Rose Garden, the President did his best to, once again, bash the United States Supreme Court.

His first foray into said conduct occurred in his State of the Union Address when, with members of the Court present, he berated them for their then recent Citizen’s United opinion.

So today, when asked a question about the Court’s on-going deliberations about the constitutionality of Obamacare,

[h]e responded by saying that he was confident the court would not take the “unprecedented, extraordinary step” of deeming the bill unconstitutional. He then pointed to the popular conservative talking point about the dangers of judicial activism, contending that if the Supreme Court threw out the mandate they would be circumventing the legislative process.

The legislative process…?  The Louisanna Purchase and the Cornhusker Kickback come to mind, but, maybe that’s just me.

Judicial activism…?  I suppose “judicial activism”, much like beauty, is in the mind of the  beholder.

 

15 replies
  1. Plainvillian
    Plainvillian says:

    If congress passed a law reestablishing slavery of blacks, would Mr. Obama want the legislative process circumvented or the constitution upheld?

  2. dairyair
    dairyair says:

    Typical of the libs…”we do what WE want. but if those evil Republicans do it, it has to be wrong!” Their egotism is beyond the pale…

  3. essneff
    essneff says:

    Apparently, POTUS doesn’t realize that the Judiciary is an equal?branch of government…… It is absolutely outrageous that a president would criticize a SCOTUS?decision?before it was rendered.. & this?man is “supposedly” a constitutional lawyer….. total bullshale, ?btw, where are his grades & transcipts from Harvard Law, Columbia & Occidental College?? We saw W’s…….I guess we know why we have not seen his!

  4. stinkfoot
    stinkfoot says:

    Isn’t openly trying to influence the outcome of an in-process deliberation illegal… akin to jury manipulation?
    ?
    Everything this little dictator does with regard to Obamacare seems to reflect comprehension that the legislation is against the law- like fast-tracking approval without giving an opportunity for congress to examine its contents to this rather obvious ploy to influence SCOTUS deliberations on the trillion dollar power grab.? The absence of calls for his impeachment is deafening.

  5. JBS
    JBS says:

    The tune in the Zero’s head is:
    “I’ll have it MY way . . . EVERYDAY . . . They’ll do it MY way. . . EVERYDAY . . . I’ll order it MY way . . . EVERYDAY . . . “

  6. Dimsdale
    Dimsdale says:

    I posted this on Twitter, but it bears repeating:? How can ?bama stand there and point the finger at an “unelected” SCOTUS of “judicial activism” when he has hoards of CZARS wielding all sorts of unconstitutional power?? Will they be disbanded in view of his new outlook?
    ?
    I invented a new word: ?pocrisy.?? (if I did invent it, I am trademarking and copyrighting it!!? LOL!)

    • Lynn
      Lynn says:

      Opocrisy, the perfect word. Bumper sticker or T-shirt, a hard choice.? I really hope you invented and can trademark and copyright. And Opocrisy is not hip!

  7. sammy22
    sammy22 says:

    I seem to remember that former Presidents picked even bigger fights w/ the Supreme Court. No big news here.
    ?

  8. Political Entropy
    Political Entropy says:

    I think it’s fine if the president wants to say that he disagrees with an overturn of Obamacare (IF an overturn is ever actualized). After all, he is still a citizen and the executive branch is separate from the judicial branch, and the justices should be of enough moral character not to be swayed by his inflammatory remarks. But a former constitutional law professor (senior lecturer) calling this “unprecedented” is seriously embarrassing and raises legitimate concerns about his expertise in teaching the subject at the graduate level.

    (BTW, SOS, you are the best!)

    • Dimsdale
      Dimsdale says:

      Simply more evidence that he is not as smart as they would like you to believe.? And add to that the fact he isn’t smart enough to know that he is demonstrating his ignorance (or smothering it with hubris).

Comments are closed.