Skip to comments.Obama issues stern language on Supreme Court health care decision
Posted on 04/02/2012 1:43:35 PM PDT by BradtotheBone
President Obama on Monday issued stern language to the Supreme Court of the United States regarding his health care law, expressing confidence "Obamacare" will not be overturned by the nation's highest court.
"I'm confident this will be upheld because it should be upheld," the president said Monday afternoon at a White House press conference that included Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Mexican President Felipe Calderon, who are attending the North American Leaders' Summit. The president said overturning the law would be "an unprecedented and extraordinary step" and compared the court's rejection of the law to "judicial activism."
"For years what we've heard is the biggest problem on the bench was judicial activism," the president said, baiting conservatives who have long complained about justices' political agendas. The president stressed that the judges are "unelected" and noted that the law was passed by a democratically elected Congress.
Monday's comments were the first public warning the president has issued since the justices heard oral arguments last week on the constitutionality of the law, which includes an individual health care mandate.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
Maybe it's time to ice some champagne?
I sure hope you are right. It could also be they voted to upheld and Zero and Biden are on an ego trip.
Meanwhile, the drumbeat of Dictator Baby-Doc Barack continues to grow louder :
- regulate - control - destroy - Regulate - control - destroy - REgulate - control - destroy - REGulate - control - destroy - REGU
I think this is Obama's way of telling the Supremes that he has no intention of stopping implementation in the event the Obamacare goes against him. Sort of like Old Ironsides threatening "John Marshall has made his decision, now let him enforce it!"
The 19th Century gave the world heavyweights like Max Planck and Albert Einstein.
The 20th Century gave us towering figures like Enrico Fermi, Winston Churchill and Werner Von Braun.
The 21st century gives us a featherweight named Barack Obama in the presidency to show how far we have fallen toward the lowest common denominator.
"I'm confident this will be upheld because it should be upheld"
Well then, that should give the Supremes all the intellectual and historical guidance they need.
The Arrogant Dunce
” The president stressed that the judges are “unelected” “
Anybody have a copy of the graduation picture of Obama’s Harvard Law School class?
I agree, but I have to wonder why so many FReepers were thrilled when Gingrich announced that, as president, he would ignore Supreme Court decisions he disagreed with. Everyone seemed to think that was a peachy precedent to set.
Now, not so much.
Watch Pelosi for indicators too. I doubt the leaks would have stopped with Barry.
Not the first time Obama has insulted PM Harper. On his last visit Obama went on an anti-Keystone Pipeline tirade, and the PM standing at another podium four feet away.
For him to take conservative opposition to what they describe as "judicial activism" and attempt to turn it against the Court's appropriate role of interpreting the Constitution's limits on government power is the maneuver one might expect from him. Meanwhile, his own appointee knows exactly what conservatives have meant when they speak of "judicial activisim."
When conservatives complain about "judicial activism," they are describing the same kind of "activism" as his appointee to the Court, Sotomayor, described in her meeting at Duke University when she stated that the "court of appeals is where policy is made," and then added, "I know I shouldn't have said that, but . . . ."-- with a smile.
His open attempt at intimidating what he referred to as the "unelected" branch of government is a reminder of the wisdom of America's Founders in their making it just that: an "unelected" and, hopefully, an independent and objective group of individuals who would look to the approbation of future generations, and their liberty and freedom, rather than the railings or approval of a temporary and Partisan political leader of the moment.
I still have the picture in my mind of Bathhouse Barry reading the riot act to SCOTUS justices regarding the Citizens United decision at the 2011 SOTU, and Justice Alito mouthing the words, “Not true.”
Payback’s a b**ch, Hussein.
Balls for fifty. This from the guy who unleashed dozens of czars, a veritable army of unelected bureaucrats, multitudes of new offices, to harass the people and eat out their substance.
For Obama to mock the way our forefathers set up our Constitutional Republic shows he's not interested in continuing that system, he's interested in changing it to a Marxist form of government.
Thanks for the ping, LL2.
This is the final draft of the health care bill, Mr. President.
Well, well, gentlemen. A hefty piece, if you will. BUT, is it constitutional?
If you wish, Mr. President.
Our mantra shall now be: Impeach- Indict- Incarcerate!
If Kagan is the hold out that makes it 8-1..or Kagan and Sotomayor make it 7-2...we no longer have a Republic, and we are no longer a nation ruled by laws.
Tou have a point there except for one little thing. Newt is not the president nor does he have a chance to be elected president during this election cycle.
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.