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

It seems even liberals are unwilling to defend our Kenyan dictator.
1 posted on 04/04/2012 7:34:14 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: Oldeconomybuyer

These same liberals, the ones who helped Zero gain power, the “enlightened ones,” will be some of the first to go under a Zero-unleashed regime. Did they learn nothing from the Hitler regime?


2 posted on 04/04/2012 7:39:08 AM PDT by mancini
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
well within Congress' powers under the Commerce Clause

I wonder where ol' Ruth would place the limit of power under the Commerce Clause.
Does she think that was placed there by our founders to allow complete government control of our lives for our own good?

Probably, Yes.

God forgive me, but I hate and despise these people.

3 posted on 04/04/2012 7:42:22 AM PDT by grobdriver
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

he is taking flak from some on the Left because “we told ya you should have done Single Payer, dumbass!”


4 posted on 04/04/2012 7:43:33 AM PDT by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

9th Circuit does it all the time, overturning duly passed laws, albeit feloniously...


5 posted on 04/04/2012 7:43:49 AM PDT by dps.inspect (the system is rigged...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

Needless to say the libs are slow learners.


6 posted on 04/04/2012 7:45:35 AM PDT by ImJustAnotherOkie (zerogottago)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: All


Help End The Obama Era In 2012
Your Monthly and Quarterly Donations
Help Keep FR In the Battle!


Sponsoring FReepers are contributing
$10 Each time a New Monthly Donor signs up!
Get more bang for your FR buck!
Click Here To Sign Up Now!


7 posted on 04/04/2012 7:45:47 AM PDT by musicman (Until I see the REAL Long Form Vault BC, he's just "PRES__ENT" Obama = Without "ID")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
To be clear, I believe the individual mandate is both good policy and sound law, well within Congress' powers under the Commerce Clause.

Definite proof of liberal delusional thinking.

And yet, Obama's assault on "an unelected group of people" stopped me cold. Because, as the former constitutional law professor certainly understands, it is the essence of our governmental system to vest in the court the ultimate power to decide the meaning of the Constitution.

This may be the first recorded evidence that delusional liberals are developing an ability to recognize the Constitution. Could be career suicide.

8 posted on 04/04/2012 7:46:03 AM PDT by immadashell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

“a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress.”

A strong majority of democrats? It certainly wasn’t a ‘strong majority’ of the entire congress.

I know it doesn’t matter...but I see Bammy planting the seeds of discontent: The court is over-ruling the will of the people!....even though the majority of Americans are opposed to bammycare.


9 posted on 04/04/2012 7:47:14 AM PDT by lacrew (Mr. Soetoro, we regret to inform you that your race card is over the credit limit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
For the president to imply that the only explanation for a constitutional conclusion contrary to his own would be out-of-control conservative justices does the court a disservice.
Really? It does the court a disservice?? It's a disservice to this nation that Barack Obama, supposed professor of Constitutional law, would make such a statement. He's creating further dissension.

Anyone who had any doubts can now be assured that either 1) out President is an ignorant man, or 2) our President is a manipulative liar. Of course, the third option is that he's both. I despise him.

10 posted on 04/04/2012 7:48:36 AM PDT by Clara Lou (ABO! Go Newt!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

Yep. She nails it. This is not about the health care mandate or Obamacare.

This is about Obama’s statements about the Supreme court. And in those few remarks is a wealth of information about him. And it is all bad.

Again, this is not about how the supreme court decides. It is about what Obama said about the court in general. It is damning. He really stepped in it this time and intelligent people know it.


13 posted on 04/04/2012 8:00:48 AM PDT by cuban leaf (Were doomed! Details at eleven.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

Sounds more to me like somebody looking for cover before the lid comes off of this can of worms The 0 kicked over.

...and all he’s doing is lying to cover lies and depending on the media to cover for him.

Real bad time to be a ‘rat at ANY level. Much more of this stuff and The 0 is going to flush himself down the toilet, and the DNC, all the libs and the media are just going to have to hope that they don’t go as well.

I’m really, truly Sorry ‘Bout That. (Check with one of my brothers for the translation.....)


14 posted on 04/04/2012 8:09:34 AM PDT by Unrepentant VN Vet ((289 and a wakeup) Truth, I know, always resides wherever brave men still have ammunition.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

This liberal is too stupid for her own safety. If she is a supporter of the mandate and Obamacare, then she ought to be smart enough to understand that it is in no way authorized by the Constitution, just like most of what the feds do these days. As a result, the job of the Supreme Court is political, to allow socialism and require socialism when conservatives manage to pass a conservative rollback law. Its decisions are not based on words, or reason or principle, but on what the liberal agenda demands. Obama, from his perspective, is right to go after the Supreme Court for standing in the way of progress. He is a consistent tyrant. This lady is for the rule of law (doing what the Supremes say) but wants the SC to act unlawfully. And she has no idea that is what she believes.


15 posted on 04/04/2012 8:12:49 AM PDT by Defiant (If there are infinite parallel universes, why Lord, am I living in the one with Obama as President?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

Obama doesn’t understand federalism...he does not understand the concept of separation of powers.

What is becoming clear is that the msm is protecting him from demands he show his college grades. This man was an affirmative-action admittee, the Law Review needed a black face at its head.

The more this guy is off is teleprompter...we continue to catch glimpses of his real persona. He’s not especially bright. He does not understand how the legal system works...he knows one thing...community organizing...he’s a black Alinsky.

No birth certificate, no ss #, faked selective service record...there’s no there, there.

This guy’s a fake.


20 posted on 04/04/2012 8:47:27 AM PDT by kjo (+)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
It seems even liberals are unwilling to defend our Kenyan dictator.

They'd better start defending those Supreme Court justices before some Chicago gargoyles start arranging "accidents".

22 posted on 04/04/2012 8:51:42 AM PDT by lentulusgracchus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
"Because, as the former constitutional law professor certainly understands..."

Repeat a lie often enough, the Democrats and their newsrooms know, and some people eventually believe it.

The skinny little POS Ubama was no "constitutional law professor". He was basically a guest lecturer who was little more than an occasional substitute teacher for the real professors.

Here is an interesting recent post from freeper, AnAmericanMother:

4 posted on Monday, April 02, 2012 8:27:56 PM by AnAmericanMother

"He was an "adjunct professor" = a non-tenure-track resume-enhancer for local lawyers to 'give back' to their alma mater. It's also a way for the law school to keep in touch with local law firms or (in Obama's case) do a favor for some influential local politician.

"I was an "adjunct professor" for years at my law school, but I was never under any illusions as to the importance of it or that it meant that I was a particularly learned person or great lawyer. I was helping out my school and getting something nice and public-spirited to put on my resume, nothing more.

"-- this sort of position I suppose is technically speaking a "professor" because it's in the title, but it is either unpaid or carries a very small honorarium. IIRC, I got the whopping sum of $200 for a whole semester's work. Didn't even pay for my outlay in gas and paper, never mind my time."

24 posted on 04/04/2012 9:00:20 AM PDT by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

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