Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Obama warns 'unelected' Supreme Court against striking down health law
FoxNews.com ^ | April 2, 2012

Posted on 04/02/2012 12:46:07 PM PDT by Deo volente

President Obama, employing his strongest language to date on the Supreme Court review of the federal health care overhaul, cautioned the court Monday against overturning the law -- while repeatedly saying he's "confident" it will be upheld.

(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...


TOPICS: Breaking News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: 2012; 2012election; backoffbarry; bhofascism; bhotyranny; bullyinchief; contempt; contemptofcourt; contemptofscotus; corruption; cwii; democrats; dictator; dictatorinchief; donttreadonme; elections; fubo; govtabuse; impeach; kagan; liberals; lping; marxism; narcissistinchief; obama; obamacare; obamapoleon; obamathreatensscotus; obamatruthfile; obameltdown; remembernovember; scotus; separationofpowers; socialistdemocrats; socialisthealthcare; treason; tyranny; tyrantinchief; unconstitutional; waronscotus
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220 ... 301-319 next last
To: bolobaby

oh right after that secret vote by the court you can bet Kagan was on the phone calling her boss what and how the results and and who voted how went


181 posted on 04/02/2012 3:17:16 PM PDT by manc (Marriage is between one man and one woman,It's not a conservative view but a true American view)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Leep

?????


182 posted on 04/02/2012 3:17:40 PM PDT by Leep (Enemy of the Statist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 180 | View Replies]

To: Deo volente

“questioned how an “unelected group of people” could overturn a law approved by Congress.”

Congress? The 8% approval rating Congress?

Guess what 0bysmal - You are done! So are the rest of our lame-@ss “leaders” in DC. The tide is turning.

Please hold the line, people. This can be a turning point if we don’t wimp out.


183 posted on 04/02/2012 3:21:29 PM PDT by APatientMan (Pick a side)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Deo volente

Looks like he’s warning them that if they don’t uphold obamacare, he will ignore the decision based on it was judicial activism by unelected people. It wouldn’t be the first time a president has ignored a SC ruling. And Ginsberg would probably agree with him.


184 posted on 04/02/2012 3:27:09 PM PDT by chessplayer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: getmeouttaPalmBeachCounty_FL
"Seems our only hope is for the Supreme Court to Bit@h slap the Executive Branch."

Marbury v. Madison is the landmark case that Democrats revere, where Justice John Marshall stated:

"It is emphatically the province and duty of the Judicial Department to say what the law is ..."

Or did our "esteemed" Constitutional Perfessor forget this ???

If I was a law student who was "taught" by Obama - I'd ask for my fuggin' money back ...

185 posted on 04/02/2012 3:27:52 PM PDT by Lmo56 (If ya wanna run with the big dawgs - ya gotta learn to piss in the tall grass ...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 155 | View Replies]

To: Deo volente

And how do we deal with this little arrogant pr#ck? In November we vote in mass, we give him such a smack down that his mother will feel it


186 posted on 04/02/2012 4:01:46 PM PDT by ronnie raygun (B B)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Deo volente

And how do we deal with this little arrogant pr#ck? In November we vote in mass, no matter who the nominee is, we give him such a smack down that his mother will feel it


187 posted on 04/02/2012 4:03:51 PM PDT by ronnie raygun (B B)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Deo volente

And how do we deal with this little arrogant pr#ck? In November we vote in mass, no matter who the nominee is, we give him such a smack down that his mother will feel it


188 posted on 04/02/2012 4:04:16 PM PDT by ronnie raygun (B B)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Deo volente

Obama sets a very high bar for himself but this may be the most arrogant and offensive thing I have ever heard him say. It ought to be noted that 22% of this “unelected” court are his own nominees and that all seven were confirmed by the votes of 100 elected U.S. Senators.

Maybe we should remember this the next time Eric Holder of one of the hundreds of other “unelected” czars and cabinet appointees makes a decision.

If I’m Romney or Santorum, I hit this comment with both barrels.


189 posted on 04/02/2012 4:06:15 PM PDT by OrangeHoof (Obama: The Dr. Kevorkian of the American economy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Deo volente

FUBO!


190 posted on 04/02/2012 4:07:16 PM PDT by Road Warrior 04 (I miss President Bush! 2012 - The End Of An Error! (Oathkeeper))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Deo volente

Aren’t his Czars an “unelected group of people”

That’s what I thought.

Friggin pathetic excuse for a pResident.


191 posted on 04/02/2012 4:10:02 PM PDT by unixfox (Abolish Slavery, Repeal The 16th Amendment!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SMM48

right here.


192 posted on 04/02/2012 4:11:20 PM PDT by Michael Barnes (Obamaa+ Downgrade)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 167 | View Replies]

To: COUNTrecount

What about the panel that decides who gets health care? Who elected them?


193 posted on 04/02/2012 4:13:05 PM PDT by DLfromthedesert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Deo volente

This tact could backfire badly for BO. I still think this is going 6-3 to overturn the whole enchilada; but the legal opinion for the majority could be great fun to read after this Al Sharpton move by the President.


194 posted on 04/02/2012 4:13:12 PM PDT by Rutles4Ever (Ubi Petrus, ibi ecclesia, et ubi ecclesia vita eterna!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Deo volente

Bowbama and his unelected Attorney General and his minions, are going after the states who have passed certain laws Bowbama doesn’t like! What about those laws passed by elected officials? What a putz!


195 posted on 04/02/2012 4:13:36 PM PDT by Road Warrior 04 (I miss President Bush! 2012 - The End Of An Error! (Oathkeeper))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WayneS

A strong majority? LOL Barely passed by bribes and lies


196 posted on 04/02/2012 4:16:17 PM PDT by DLfromthedesert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: John Semmens
Paging John Semmens!!

Somebody is trying to take over the SEMI-NEWS/SEMI-SATIRE concession....

197 posted on 04/02/2012 4:19:28 PM PDT by dayglored (Listen, strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Raycpa

“Good news. This indicates he did not get a secret phone call from the SC saying they voted to keep Obama care. If anything the call was bad news for him.”

I kind of agree. The SC judges had a preliminary vote in chambers Friday. The most likely leak back to the White House is that sleazebag Kagan, his former solicitor general, who should have recused herself anyway. I was looking for Obama to start attacking the SC preemptively if he did get word back from her that it did not look good for Obamacare.His attacking the SC today may be a good sign.


198 posted on 04/02/2012 4:19:53 PM PDT by chuckee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: ronnie raygun

The SC can rule it is unconstitutional. But it has no ability or power to enforce its ruling. If Obama continues like it didn’t happen, who will enforce it? Holder? Good luck. He can continue pressing forward like it never happened. CMS has already issued guideline that regardless of the ruling they will continue implementing all the parts of the law related to cost savings and compliance. He is laying the groundwork for ignoring the ruling.


199 posted on 04/02/2012 4:20:53 PM PDT by lynn4303
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 186 | View Replies]

To: chuckee
..who should have recused herself anyway.

I keep seeing this over and over. I'm wondering if there are cases already that show reversal of a decision due to a judge NOT recusing themselves. If so, even if O-care is held up, why not more suits due to Kagan herself? She clearly has a conflict of interest here and cannot be impartial.

200 posted on 04/02/2012 4:25:32 PM PDT by Michael Barnes (Obamaa+ Downgrade)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 198 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220 ... 301-319 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson