He's a Chicago thug politician, that's the only thing he knows.
Not sure its appropriate??? For God's sake what planet are you from? Grow a pair for once and call him what he is..a petite dictator.
He is not sure intimidating the SCOTUS is appropriate? Gee, would a baseball bat to their heads make you sure Lamar? Or would you still not be sure?
Now my next question is where were Boehner and McConnell? golf course, cocktail party, junket, couldn't be bothered?
FUBO GTFO! 291 Days until Noon Jan 20, 2013 Just remember, if Obama had a son, he'd be a thug, too.
it’s not just the president, but the whole democrat party. their lack of respect for the Supreme Court should be shouted from the treetops, adn made a campaign issue.
Of course he wants to silence the court, he’s a thug. I wonder if they have gotten horseheads in bed yet? Maybe a finer of a relative in a UPS parcel?
Come on Congressman, if this is to be his "straw man" argument, then true conservatives need to expose, as the writer on some threads have, the fallacies of his premise.
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 tyrant of the moment.
George Washington, in his Farewell Address, warned us of such "artful" persons who, once elected to positions of temporary power, might attempt to subvert the Constitution's limits on their power.
Justice Story, in his Commentaries on the Constitution, concluded with these words:
"The national constitution is our last, and our only security. United we stand; divided we fall.
§ 1907. If these Commentaries shall but inspire in the rising generation a more ardent love of their country, an unquenchable thirst for liberty, and a profound reverence for the constitution and the Union, then they will have accomplished all, that their author ought to desire. Let the American youth never forget, that they possess a noble inheritance, bought by the toils, and sufferings, and blood of their ancestors; and capable, if wisely improved, and faithfully guarded, of transmitting to their latest posterity all the substantial blessings of fife, the peaceful enjoyment of liberty, property, religion, and independence. The structure has been erected by architects of consummate skill and fidelity; its foundations are solid; its compartments are beautiful, as well as useful; its arrangements are full of wisdom and order; and its defences are impregnable from without. It has been reared for immortality, if the work of man may justly aspire to such a title. It may, nevertheless, perish in an hour by the folly, or corruption, or negligence of its only keepers, THE PEOPLE. Republics are created by the virtue, public spirit, and intelligence of the citizens. They fall, when the wise are banished from the public councils, because they dare to be honest, and the profligate are rewarded, because they flatter the people, in order to betray them."
Why in the world would anyone here be angry with Urkel? Do you really think that he could say or do anything that would push SCOTUS towards his point of view? If anything he cemented the SCOTUS conservatives and possibly some of the liberals to go in the opposite direction.
The SCOTUS is filled with superegos and the last thing you want to do is use the bully pulpit and dictate to them.
Again, Urkel proves he is twice as smart as Biden and Biden is a half wit.
Fortunately, Baby Doc Obama knows no limit to creative self-destruction.
He’s campaigning every second of every day. Every event is scrutinzed and analyzed to see how it can be used in the presidential race.
Technically true. No argument.
But under fraudulent pretenses, and resulting in the biggest Congressional elections defeat in 75 years for the "progressives.".
Was there a profound message there?
As for "unprecedented..." our Constitutional Scholar, Baby Doc, is lecturing the Supreme Court and claiming that laws passed by a Congress, and signed by a president have never been ruled unconstitutional.