Posted on 04/03/2012 2:14:46 AM PDT by Libloather
Obama is just trying to figure out how to play this....and to remind “the new girls on the block” as to how they got there.
I wish we had a president who appreciated our system of government instead of being the lead bully trying to undo it.
I thought it was illegal to try to pressure judges . . . well, maybe not anymore; after all, contract killings seem to be acceptable now . . .
The assertion that welfare and social security would be threatened is ridiculous. It’s one thing to take my taxes and dole it out, it’s another to force me to PURCHASE A PRODUCT FROM ANOTHER ENTITY.
I wonder if Obama is aware that not all laws passed by the congress are necessarily constitutional? Our country has checks and balances in order to ensure that the law is constitutional. There are many, many examples of past controversial rulings in which cases an unconstitutional law was not upheld for obvious reasons.
Many, if not most Americans know this.
Sounds like we have a Bunch of Radicals and some Prima Donnas on the Court,God Help us all
Kagan has already given them the bad news, based on Obama’s reaction here.
I am surprised he didn't add a law degree to his resume.
It's certainly looking that way...
shaddap...You sound like you’re from Brooklyn, my home town!
So thank you, Justice Kagan for giving us a sneak peak at the SCOTUS decision.
We are seeing the left resort to intimidation, personal attacks, and throwing fits on a daily basis now. It’s becoming a moment to moment way of life for them and it is starting to seem normal behavior to many people who seem to just excuse it out of hand.
America is truly lost if we can demand no better from elected officials.
You knew she'd look like this.
It is my hope that as things began to unravel, that more and more people will see the administration for what it is. Threatening the highest court? Maybe the SCOTUS has smoked out the imposter and also found the mole.
So what?
“fiercely” as in holding their breath AND stamping their little feet.
One thing that falls under the same premise as the “individual mandate” is government offices and institutions playing the part of “enforcer” for AFSCME and other public employee unions, ie, deducting union dues from your wages so the employee is stripped of any choice in the matter. That practice, much like the individual mandate, forces workers - who pay taxes to support the government - to pay unions dues regardless of whether these people WANT to belong to the union or not. (Of course they are offered the “alternative” of donating that money to a charity of the UNION’S choice.) This is NOT the government’s first foray into forcing people to pay for a product they neither want or need and acting as enforcer. From the viewpoint of many of us, the court is our last and possibly only defense against a government run amok.
I agree. The little troll called her buddy on Thursday to tell him and it took all weekend to get the other 'Rats (Blumenthal, Leahy & Schumer) on board with the talking points.
There's no a doubt in my mind that her nomination was contingent on her not recusing herself from the case and that she would keep them informed early on the decision.
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.