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

This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies.
Locked on 04/04/2012 9:03:35 AM PDT by Sidebar Moderator, reason:

dupe: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2867968/posts



Skip to comments.

Men in Black
The New York Times ^ | April 3, 2012 | Maureen Dowd

Posted on 04/04/2012 8:37:32 AM PDT by Belteshazzar

How dare President Obama brush back the Supreme Court like that?

Has this former constitutional law instructor no respect for our venerable system of checks and balances?

Nah. And why should he?

This court, cosseted behind white marble pillars, out of reach of TV, accountable to no one once they give the last word, is well on its way to becoming one of the most divisive in modern American history.

It has squandered even the semi-illusion that it is the unbiased, honest guardian of the Constitution. It is run by hacks dressed up in black robes ...

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


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: commerceclause; healthcare; obama; supremecourt
MoDo is a DoDo
1 posted on 04/04/2012 8:37:43 AM PDT by Belteshazzar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Belteshazzar

off the wagon again?


2 posted on 04/04/2012 8:42:31 AM PDT by tgusa (gun control: deep breath, sight alignment, squeeze the trigger .......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Belteshazzar
It is run by hacks dressed up in black robes.

I'm thinking treasonous, and maybe jail time for MoDo...

3 posted on 04/04/2012 8:42:45 AM PDT by moovova (Comments at FreeRepublic are WAY MORE interesting than the articles.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Belteshazzar
>>> It is run by hacks dressed up in black robes ... another low for MSM
4 posted on 04/04/2012 8:44:10 AM PDT by SIRTRIS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Belteshazzar

Read the bylines first!

Save your sanity!


5 posted on 04/04/2012 8:45:57 AM PDT by Bigun ("The most fearsome words in the English language are I'm from the government and I'm here to help!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tgusa
off the wagon again?

I thought the exact same thing.

6 posted on 04/04/2012 8:46:08 AM PDT by Drill Thrawl (Brass, copper, lead. The new precious metals.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Belteshazzar

Why do you bother to post this crap????


7 posted on 04/04/2012 8:46:30 AM PDT by Nifster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Belteshazzar

Well Maureen Dowd, those hacks dressed up in black robes were appointed by BOTH Republican and Democrat President and approved by a majority of Democrats and Republicans in Congress.
Oh your poor whiney, dried up bag of hot air, what will you do now?


8 posted on 04/04/2012 8:46:53 AM PDT by SECURE AMERICA (Where can I sign up for the New American Revolution and the Crusades 2012?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Belteshazzar

Does anyone actually need further proof that the quota baby got into Harvard because 1) Harvard has no standards for quota babys, 2) quota babies have no standards for anything, and 3) the MSM has no standards for determining that the Obamaloon is a vapid quota baby who couldn’t even become as janitor at a top school (back when we actually thought that Harvard was a top school).


9 posted on 04/04/2012 8:47:59 AM PDT by Da Coyote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Belteshazzar
Rules:


10 posted on 04/04/2012 8:48:55 AM PDT by DemforBush (A Repo man is *always* intense!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Belteshazzar

Fine! Have a constitutional convention and make it a law that Supreme Court Justices have no standing because they were appointed, not elected, and pre-date the law to 2009.

Also, make it a law that czars cannot be appointed by a pResident.


11 posted on 04/04/2012 8:49:33 AM PDT by kitkat (Obama, rope and chains)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DemforBush

This is the only reason why I’m here!


12 posted on 04/04/2012 8:51:02 AM PDT by Batman11 (Obama's poll numbers are so low the Kenyans are claiming he was born in the USA!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Nifster; Belteshazzar
Why do you bother to post this crap????

See post 10. Like moths to a flame, we are.

13 posted on 04/04/2012 8:53:26 AM PDT by Notary Sojac (Mi tio esta enfermo, pero la carretera es verde!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Belteshazzar
The left are beside themselves over the upcoming ruling.

I'm becoming convinced that Obamacare is doomed.

14 posted on 04/04/2012 8:54:14 AM PDT by Pox (Good Night. I expect more respect tomorrow.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Belteshazzar
Woman in black

15 posted on 04/04/2012 8:54:51 AM PDT by y6162
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: moovova
I'm thinking treasonous, and maybe jail time for MoDo...

For what? This very forum's posters call "black robes" tyrants all the time. Should we all be arrested?

16 posted on 04/04/2012 8:55:58 AM PDT by Michael Barnes (Obamaa+ Downgrade)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Belteshazzar

re: “This court, cosseted behind white marble pillars, out of reach of TV, accountable to no one once they give the last word, is well on its way to becoming one of the most divisive in modern American history. It has squandered even the semi-illusion that it is the unbiased, honest guardian of the Constitution.”

Oh, that’s rich coming from Maureen - who believes in real federal court judicial activism. I’m sure Ms. Dowd had no problem with the 1973 Court “finding” the “right” to abortion in the Constitution or with federal judges in California and Arizona who annulled the legal elective processes in those states by continually putting on hold election results that liberals don’t like - such as California’s attempt to protect taxpayers from having to pay for illegal aliens costs in schooling and healthcare.

When the majority of California’s voters decided against same sex marriage a single federal judge said they couldn’t do that.

When the DOJ sues Arizona for daring to try to protects its borders - something which the federal government is supposed to do.

Yes, Maureen has no problem with that kind of judicial activism - but, the Supreme Court daring to say a law passed by congress is unconstitutional - which, by the way, they haven’t done yet - no, says Ms. Dowd - that partisan, biased and purely political.

I agree that the federal courts have been/are occupied with judges and courts who are continually creating law from the bench, exercising tyrannical powers against the people of the individual states - but, when the court actually fulfills its true purpose - protecting the Constitution from the “living” constitution advocates - then, that’s bad according to Maureen. Perhaps she needs to read Mark Levin’s book, “Men in Black”.


17 posted on 04/04/2012 8:56:58 AM PDT by rusty schucklefurd
[ 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!


18 posted on 04/04/2012 9:00:16 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: Belteshazzar
Geez Mo, if I knew dumping you would cause you to totally self destruct like this I might have reconsidered.... not really

Michael

19 posted on 04/04/2012 10:10:23 AM PDT by getgo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: moovova
Treasonous? No way, 1st Amendment rights apply. people such as this should be encouraged to speak their minds because it is the best way for sane people to see what the left is really all about.

These people are their own worst enemy.

20 posted on 04/04/2012 10:10:32 AM PDT by getgo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: moovova

Actually, criticizing the Supreme Court is neither treasonous, nor does it invite “jail time”. Your comment is the very reason liberals don’t take us seriously when we conservatives state that we are anti-government.

You can be opposed to expansion of government power, or you can want people thrown in jail for criticizing Supreme Court Justices, but you cannot hold both positions at once.


21 posted on 04/04/2012 10:10:57 AM PDT by JCS658
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

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