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

Skip to comments.

Obama takes a shot at Supreme Court over healthcare (Obama's trying to intimidate the SCOTUS)
reuters ^ | 4/2/2012 | Jeff Mason

Posted on 04/02/2012 2:41:10 PM PDT by tobyhill

President Barack Obama took an opening shot at conservative justices on the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday, warning that a rejection of his sweeping healthcare law would be an act of "judicial activism" that Republicans say they abhor.

Obama, a Democrat, had not commented publicly on the Supreme Court's deliberations since it heard arguments for and against the healthcare law last week.

Known as the "Affordable Care Act" or "Obamacare," the measure to expand health insurance for millions of Americans is considered Obama's signature domestic policy achievement.

A rejection by the court would be a big blow to Obama going into the November 6 presidential election.

Republican presidential candidates, who are vying to take on Obama in November elections, have promised to repeal the law if one of them wins the White House.

Obama's advisers say they have not prepared contingency plans if the measure fails. But the president -- who expressed confidence that the court would uphold the law -- made clear how he would address it on the campaign trail if the court strikes down the law.

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


TOPICS: Extended News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: abortion; bullyinchief; deathpanels; dictatorinchief; kagan; narcissistinchief; obamacare; obamapoleon; obameltdown; scotus; separationofpowers; tyrantinchief; waronscotus; zerocare
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101 next last
To: tobyhill
Image and video hosting by TinyPic
51 posted on 04/02/2012 3:49:25 PM PDT by greenhornet68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pfflier
Sorry, I got that all messed up. Should have read:

This is the second round. Remember the scotus jab at his state of the union speech?????

52 posted on 04/02/2012 3:51:03 PM PDT by pfflier
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill
I think he already knows that he won. From Kagen or Sotomayor.
53 posted on 04/02/2012 3:54:37 PM PDT by deweyfrank
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: demkicker
Here’s hoping the majority of Supreme’s won’t take kindly to BO’s ‘Chicago Way’ of threatening aka his ‘boot on their necks approach’

Four members of the SC would just kiss his butt. These four have no idea what the Constitutions means and are hard core socialists.

54 posted on 04/02/2012 3:56:10 PM PDT by Logical me
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: allmost

This guy was a community organizer which means rabble rouser. He is a first class crook. However he is smart and that makes him very dangerous.


55 posted on 04/02/2012 3:56:10 PM PDT by entropy12 (Every tax payer now owes $150,000 towards the national debt. Greek tragedy on the way here.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: allmost
personal inflections cannot be determined afterward. Nor should they be. It was all me.

Perhaps the other poster neglected to italicize your statements, and they appeared to be their own. I went back and looked at their post, and I only responded to what looked like their comments.

56 posted on 04/02/2012 3:56:42 PM PDT by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: dandiegirl

That is why I put it in quotes! LOL!


57 posted on 04/02/2012 3:59:30 PM PDT by ExTxMarine (PRAYER: It's the only HOPE for real CHANGE in America!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach; AdmSmith; AnonymousConservative; Berosus; bigheadfred; Bockscar; ColdOne; ...

Thanks tobyhill.


58 posted on 04/02/2012 4:02:21 PM PDT by SunkenCiv (FReepathon 2Q time -- https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Windflier

Nevermind then ‘Windflier’. Better?


59 posted on 04/02/2012 4:04:54 PM PDT by allmost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: deweyfrank
I think it's the opposite. I think he has gotten word that the Individual Mandate will be ruled unconstitutional but that the rest will stand. Obama will send his surrogates out there to downplay the effects of the Individual Mandate on the overall law but then claim victory on the rest such as penalizing companies $2,000 for not supplying insurance.
60 posted on 04/02/2012 4:06:34 PM PDT by tobyhill (Fight Fire With Fire)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: allmost
Nevermind then ‘Windflier’. Better?

No need to go all 'sneer quote' on me. I'm just trying to straighten out a simple mis-communciation.

Later.

61 posted on 04/02/2012 4:14:24 PM PDT by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: Windflier
"No need to go all 'sneer quote' on me. I'm just trying to straighten out a simple mis-communciation. Later. "

Great. You understood.
62 posted on 04/02/2012 4:19:16 PM PDT by allmost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: pfflier
"Remember the scotus jab at his state of the union speech?????"

I do and I also am aware of Obama's recent appearance of a collusion with Russian's Medvedev. This half-Black, half-American is a snake-in-the-grass, America needs to be rid of his kind.

63 posted on 04/02/2012 4:23:12 PM PDT by yoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: entropy12
Sorry, got distracted your post55 rabble rouser sounds like an interesting take.
64 posted on 04/02/2012 4:23:16 PM PDT by allmost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: P.O.E.
I guess I should’ve said “supposedly” has any expertise.

No biggie. I just hate seeing liberal propaganda seeping its way into conservatives' knowledge base. It's false data, and should be rooted out, wherever it's found.

I totally agree with you that Obama is a puppet who's been molded and shaped by hidden and powerful masters. You're absolutely right about his hatred of traditional America, and everything our country stands for. It comes across in nearly everything he says and does.

In any event, he’s mostly a puppet. I’d love to see a thorough expose of who’s been moving him along all these decades. I’d guess it’s way more than just Soros and Ayers.

You've definitely got to figure in the radical black supremacist element and his Islamic ties.

Commie, Muslim, racist, narcissist. Who would have ever thought that we'd see that unlikely combination in a US president? It still boggles the mind.

65 posted on 04/02/2012 4:23:56 PM PDT by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: allmost

Well, good day to you too.


66 posted on 04/02/2012 4:25:24 PM PDT by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: cajungirl

That was my thinking, as well.

But, perhaps we are over-thinking things.


67 posted on 04/02/2012 4:29:27 PM PDT by reformedliberal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Windflier

No sarcasm, no problem, Deep breath. I do not exist. That’s cool.


68 posted on 04/02/2012 4:31:54 PM PDT by allmost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: Windflier

And a good morning to you sir.


69 posted on 04/02/2012 4:43:29 PM PDT by allmost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: Windflier

And a good morning to you sir.


70 posted on 04/02/2012 4:45:04 PM PDT by allmost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill
I am reminded of the State of the Union address by Dear Leader, where a Congressman was brave enough to shout “You lie” when the Dear Leader told a Whopper. I also remember a different State of the Union address where a Supreme Court Judge mouthed the words without volume “not true” when Dear Leader again lied before the assembled political leaders of this country.

Maybe it is time for Judicial Activism and the majority of the Supreme Court to come out and tell the public that Dear Leader (and Nancy P. and Harry R) were all liars.

If the President will not be civil toward the Supreme Court, why should the Court be limited to civil discourse with Dear Leader?

71 posted on 04/02/2012 4:50:19 PM PDT by Robert357 (D.Rather "Hoist with his own petard!" www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1223916/posts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dandiegirl
We’ve never actually seen proof that he was a “constitutional scholar”.

You know what cracks me up? That everyone is acting like O should have know better being a Constitional scholar and all.

But who among us actually believes he even read the bill much less scoured it for Constitutional adherence?

72 posted on 04/02/2012 4:50:42 PM PDT by Kenny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill

The only judicial activism is Kagan not recusing herself.


73 posted on 04/02/2012 4:54:19 PM PDT by PhiloBedo (You gotta roll with the punches and get with what's real.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oshkalaboomboom

They can change their vote.


74 posted on 04/02/2012 4:55:28 PM PDT by Gator113 (** President Newt Gingrich-"Our beloved republic deserves nothing less." ~Just livin' life, my way~)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill

Skittles has spoken.


75 posted on 04/02/2012 5:03:47 PM PDT by Gator113 (** President Newt Gingrich-"Our beloved republic deserves nothing less." ~Just livin' life, my way~)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dandiegirl
We’ve never actually seen proof that he was a “constitutional scholar”.

A "Constitutional Scholar" by whose definition? Usually those classes are just arguing about what the words mean without taking the words at face value....other opinions and we know what Obama's opinion is about the United States Constitution.

76 posted on 04/02/2012 5:07:17 PM PDT by yoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill

Thuggish towards the Court like his hero FDR? I’m shocked. /s


77 posted on 04/02/2012 5:11:08 PM PDT by newzjunkey (Newt says, "A nominee that depresses turnout won't beat Barack Obama.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill

Does he not realize this is likely to backfire on him? Just like his public scolding of them during his State of the Union Speech. People don’t take kindly to being bullied.


78 posted on 04/02/2012 5:15:27 PM PDT by Persevero (Homeschooling for Excellence since 1992)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: headstamp 2

Narcissism. Obama believes he is the one.


79 posted on 04/02/2012 5:25:55 PM PDT by HMS Surprise (Chris Christie can still go to hell.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill

Well, I go back and forth. I think one of them have given him a heads up. He’s acting like he knows he lost. But, he usually acts one way and is already planning strategy for the opposite direction. He’s planning to spring some kind of trap. That’s my convoluted theory. LOL


80 posted on 04/02/2012 5:39:08 PM PDT by deweyfrank
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: JimmyMc
Judicial activism is OK when it is in Barack’s an progresives favor.

What you say is true, but not applicable to this situation. It is not judicial activism when an unconstitutional law is shot down. It is judicial activism when a right that is not in the Constitution is created. There is a big difference, and Obama knows that. He, as a student of Alinsky, knows that framing the language is key to the debate. He loves to make words into their opposite.

81 posted on 04/02/2012 5:49:46 PM 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 6 | View Replies]

To: Defiant
It is judicial activism when a right that is not in the Constitution is created.

I question that. The ninth amendment says "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."

The Constitution doesn't specify how those unenumerated rights become recognized, but I don't see that it rules out such by the courts. The legislature doesn't seem to be the correct place because it should be based on a petition from the people who already own these rights.

I've often wondered how the founders envisioned these rights becoming identified and honored.

82 posted on 04/02/2012 6:00:36 PM PDT by gitmo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: allmost
Deep breath. I do not exist. That’s cool.

LOL. It really ain't that serious :-)

83 posted on 04/02/2012 6:12:57 PM PDT by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: Windflier

I know;)


84 posted on 04/02/2012 6:20:37 PM PDT by allmost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: Sir Napsalot

Let me urge you to carefully re-think your position.

If you choose not to vote, or to vote for some third party candidate, you effectively will b voting for Obama.

Do you really want Obama to be President for four more years?


85 posted on 04/02/2012 7:59:44 PM PDT by Taxman (So that the beautiful pressure does not diminish!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill

Heh. I can just hear Scalia saying “Bring it, punk!”


86 posted on 04/02/2012 8:01:46 PM PDT by SuziQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Taxman

It’s no use.

Some freepers feel Obama is preferable to Romney.


87 posted on 04/02/2012 8:02:57 PM PDT by ladyjane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: ladyjane

I cannot believe that ANY FReeper will sit this election out, or vote third party!

We must work to elect a conservative House and Senate and defeat the LIEberal/Socialist/Marxist/Fascist SOB in the White House.


88 posted on 04/02/2012 8:32:07 PM PDT by Taxman (So that the beautiful pressure does not diminish!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: ladyjane

PS I do not believe that it is a waste of time to urge folks to vote against Obama.

If we don’t defeat him, we’ll surely get the government we deserve!


89 posted on 04/02/2012 8:33:48 PM PDT by Taxman (So that the beautiful pressure does not diminish!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: gitmo
Your formulation would allow judges to create any right they wanted to. That is a recipe for tyranny. That's not how it works.

The rights referred to in the 9th Amendment were rights that existed at that time, in 1789. They were saying, basically, that if they left anything out, it was "retained" by the people. Not that rights that did not then exist could be created willy-nilly by the courts out of thin air, but that rights that the people already had would continue to be recognized.

Abortion, gay marriage and the right to a taxpayer paid lawyer were not rights that existed in 1789, to give three examples. They were created by judges acting in a legislative capacity.

The way to recognize a right not referred to in the Bill of Rights would be to assert it in a court of law, and then cite precedent for it. American law accepted the precedents of English common law up to the time of the founding, and then separated at that point. After that point, the only principled way to create a "right" was through legislative action, an action taken by the elected representatives of the people.

90 posted on 04/02/2012 11:42:42 PM 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 82 | View Replies]

To: fieldmarshaldj; AuH2ORepublican; Impy; GOPsterinMA; randita; Sun; BillyBoy

We have to get Obama and his minions out of the White House.


91 posted on 04/03/2012 5:08:07 AM PDT by Clintonfatigued (A chameleon belongs in a pet store, not the White House)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clintonfatigued
It is going to be hard to do, My FRiend. They have worked long and hard to get where they are now. While some believe that they will go quietly into the night if they lose the election, I am not in that number. Again, they have worked too hard and too long to get to where they are now to give it up merely because they lose an election.

If they refuse to leave, who will oppose them? Congress? A good portion of Congress will made up of Democrats When is the last time Congressional Republicans have battled nose to nose and toe to toe with the Democrats and obama? For that matter, when was the first time?The Courts? A good number of the Courts [Judges]are controlled by the Democrat Party and other the people's will to comply, They have no enforcement power. The Republican Party? If the Republican Party was serious about returning the Constitutional principles, do you believe that they would be nominate and be backing someone such as Mitt Romney? The police? The police long ago sold their souls to the Federal Government for Federal dollars. They are now a fully owned subsutsy of the Department of Homeland Security, which is under the control and irection of barack obama. The people? As long as their balls are empty and their stomaches are full, they have beer to drink, dope to smoke and sports to watch on t.v, 99% of the people could not care less about things that effect the lives of them and their families.

In short, we have a hell of a job cut out for us. It can be done. That it is a big job and it can be done is not the issue. What the issue is, do we have the stomache to do what is necessary if push comes to shove. it is an individual decision and I pray that we do. But time will tell.

92 posted on 04/03/2012 5:39:55 AM PDT by sport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: Taxman

>>> ... to carefully re-think your position.

Your implied assumption is wrong.

I was at your stage of thinking around Sept - Nov 2008.

And I’ll tell you now even if Romney chose a STRONG conservative as his running mate, it won’t matter as much as the Palin pick.

There is not a remote chance that mitten is going to croak on the job hence let the conservative take over.


93 posted on 04/03/2012 7:18:53 AM PDT by Sir Napsalot (Pravda + Useful Idiots = CCCP; JournOList + Useful Idiots = DopeyChangey!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill
"I'm confident that the Supreme Court will not take what would be an unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress," Obama said.

This Motherhugging Kenyan Socialist Muslim Marxist Crack Smoking D**k Sucker (also known as President Barack Obama) knows full well that Judicial Review, which is their precise function, has been the job of the Supreme Court since the country was founded.

Unprecedented???!? This is the use of Hitler's Big Lie premise!!!

Let me give you a feew precedents to the Supreme Court "overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress"

Supreme Court Overturns Campaign Finance Law

Marbury v. Madison was the first instance in which a law passed by Congress was declared unconstitutional. The decision greatly expanded the power of the Court by establishing its right to overturn acts of Congress, a power not explicitly granted by the Constitution. Initially the case involved Secretary of State James Madison, who refused to seat four judicial appointees although they had been confirmed by the Senate.

And that's just two examples. There are more.

94 posted on 04/03/2012 7:47:44 AM PDT by Lazamataz (Shut up and drill.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clintonfatigued

“We have to get Obama and his minions out of the White House.”

Yesterday is not soon enough. What damage they have done to our country already.


95 posted on 04/03/2012 8:19:02 AM PDT by Sun (Pray that God sends us good leaders. Please say a prayer now.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: demkicker

If that was the preliminary vote, when is the final one? Should a judge become metabolically challenged, how do we know the final vote was/wasn’t taken?


96 posted on 04/03/2012 8:29:20 AM PDT by ctdonath2 ($1 meals: http://abuckaplate.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Sir Napsalot

Well, Sir Napsalot, sit out this election, then.

Go take your nap and see what you wake up to!

Are you sure you want to be a part of the Obama re-election?

Because that is exactly what you will be doing, and I’ll tell you what: Obama and his LIEberal hangers-on are counting on you and millions of others to do the same.

Pretty damn selfish, I’d say, for you and your ilk to say “If I can’t vote for my guy, I’m not gonna vote at all!”

Reminds me of 5 year old kids in the sandbox fighting over the red fire truck.


97 posted on 04/03/2012 8:52:17 AM PDT by Taxman (So that the beautiful pressure does not diminish!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill

What does Obama NOT understand about the three independent branches of government?

Judicial
Executive
Legislative

Why in the world is he trying to influenece the SCOYUS? Hopefully they will rebuff him. Soundly!


98 posted on 04/03/2012 9:01:51 AM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cajungirl

‘morning. Maybe. He’s doing the same today though. Doesn’t sound confident either.


99 posted on 04/03/2012 9:58:36 AM PDT by eureka! (Bless Our Troops. D*mn the Left.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Sarah Barracuda

‘morning. He’s doing the same today though, condescending to boot (”I think the justices should understand...”). Doesn’t sound confident either. ~crossing fingers~


100 posted on 04/03/2012 10:00:42 AM PDT by eureka! (Bless Our Troops. D*mn the Left.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101 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