Dr. K. notes the totalitarian tendencies inherent in Obama’s war against the Supreme Court. I guess he is right on one thing – it is easier being President of China because you are not hindered by pesky things such as the law.
by Charles Krauthammer
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.”
— Barack Obama, on the constitutional challenge to his health-care law, April 2
“Unprecedented”? Judicial review has been the centerpiece of the American constitutional system since Marbury v. Madison in 1803. “Strong majority”? The House has 435 members. In March 2010, Democrats held a 75-seat majority. Obamacare passed by seven votes.
In his next-day walk back, the president implied that he was merely talking about the normal “restraint and deference” the courts owe the legislative branch. This concern would be touching if it weren’t coming from the leader of a party so deeply devoted to the ultimate judicial usurpation — Roe v. Wade, which struck down the abortion laws of 46 states — that fealty to it is the party’s litmus test for service on the Supreme Court.
[........]
Obamacare passed the Congress without a single vote from the opposition party — in contradistinction to Social Security, the Civil Rights Act, the Voting Rights Act, Medicare and Medicaid, similarly grand legislation, all of which enjoyed substantial bipartisan support. In the Senate, moreover, Obamacare squeaked by through a parliamentary maneuver called reconciliation that was never intended for anything so sweeping. The fundamental deviation from custom and practice is not the legal challenge to Obamacare but the very manner of its enactment.
The president’s preemptive attack on the court was in direct reaction to Obamacare’s three days of oral argument. It was a shock. After years of contemptuously dismissing the very idea of a legal challenge, Democrats suddenly realized there actually is a serious constitutional argument to be made against Obamacare — and they are losing it.
Here were highly sophisticated conservative thinkers — lawyers and justices — making the case for limited government, and liberals weren’t even prepared for the obvious constitutional question: If Congress can force the individual into a private contract by authority of the commerce clause, what can it not force the individual to do? Without a limiting principle, the central premise of our constitutional system — a government of enumerated powers — evaporates. What, then, is the limiting principle?
[.......]
Justice Stephen Breyer tried to rescue the hapless Verrilli by suggesting that by virtue of being born, one enters into the “market for health care.” To which plaintiffs’ lawyer Michael Carvin devastatingly replied: If birth means entering the market, Congress is omnipotent, authorized by the commerce clause to regulate “every human activity from cradle to grave.”
[.......]
Having lost the argument, what to do? Bully. The New York Times loftily warned the Supreme Court that it would forfeit its legitimacy if it ruled against Obamacare because with the “five Republican-appointed justices supporting the challenge led by 26 Republican governors, the court will mark itself as driven by politics.”
Really? The administration’s case for the constitutionality of Obamacare was so thoroughly demolished in oral argument that one liberal observer called it “a train wreck.” It is perfectly natural, therefore, that a majority of the court should side with the argument that had so clearly prevailed on its merits. That’s not partisanship. That’s logic. Partisanship is four Democrat-appointed justices giving lock-step support to a law passed by a Democratic Congress and a Democratic president — after the case for its constitutionality had been reduced to rubble.
Democrats are reeling. Obama was so taken aback, he hasn’t even drawn up contingency plans should his cherished reform be struck down. Liberals still cannot grasp what’s happened — the mild revival of constitutionalism in a country they’ve grown so used to ordering about regardless. When asked about Obamacare’s constitutionality, Nancy Pelosi famously replied: “Are you serious?” She was genuinely puzzled.
As was Rep. Phil Hare (D-Ill.). As Michael Barone notes, when Hare was similarly challenged at a 2010 town hall, he replied: “I don’t worry about the Constitution.” Hare is now retired, having been shortly thereafter defeated for reelection by the more constitutionally attuned owner of an East Moline pizza shop.
Read the rest – Obama v. SCOTUS
Tags: Charles Krauthammer
Not a dime’s worth of deference!
We need to get some younger and conservative supreme court judges.
Speranza wrote:
…and Representatives, and Senators, and governors, and state legislators. And a President would be nice, too.
Speranza wrote:
I agree. I wish the GOP would stop pissing off young people and instead recruit them. But you and I are on the same page there.
@ buzzsawmonkey:
@ Speranza:
This is what the 3rd World Liberation thugs do. They demonize the judiciary and then go to war against it.
Rodan wrote:
Yup,it’s always the same.
That same observer, in an amazing display of intellectual prowess later down graded it to a “Plane Wreck”. Anyone who has ever witnessed a commercial plane crash simply had to shake their head in disbelief. I personally am one of those people, having witnessed the mid-air collision over San Diego California in 1978 of PSA Flight 187.
I was watching as the small Cessna banked into Flight 187 and both aircraft burst into flames in the sky and plummeted to the ground. Train wrecks are never downgraded to Plane crashes. an object falling from 30,000 feet reaches a speed of 170 miles per hour before impacting with the ground.
On the other hand, I honestly can say, that it is my most sincere hope and prayer that Obamacare does plummet 50,000 feet and achieves 170 miles per hour before it finally does impact the ground.
@ doriangrey:
At this point I would say he is in a powered descent in an SR-71. Of course, the media will say it was a perfect three point landing.
doriangrey wrote:
*gasp*
You must be one of those eeeeeeeeeevil conservatives who “wants Obama to fail!”
doriangrey wrote:
In terms of aviation metaphor, I’m seeing ObamaCare more in terms of the “Spruce Goose”….in more ways than one.
@ MacDuff:
Only if he promises to leave the country if its overturned…
buzzsawmonkey wrote:
Why not… I’ve already been classified as a knuckle dragging homophobic, Islamophobic, misogynist, bigoted RAAAAACIST bitter clinging wingnut. Just for the unforgivable sins of being White and Conservative.
MacDuff wrote:
Nope, the Spruce Goose was at least capable of doing what it was designed to do.
@ MikeA:
Hey can I email you? I have a very pleasant surprise for you!
@ Rodan:
Mail away….
@ MikeA:
You will happily surprised!
doriangrey wrote:
Actually I was thinking an over-budget testament to one man’s ego that was effectively obsolete before its completion……
@ MikeA:
Sent and you will be surprised!
@ MacDuff:
……
If the Spruce Goose would have participated in the
Michelle Obama “Lets Move” work outs, it would
have been able to fly.
RIX wrote:
Ummm, the Spruce Goose was able to fly.
A black dude’s on Cavuto opposing a Wal-Mart planned for DC, which means 1,800 jobs, because it negatively effects the “community” and it doesn’t offer “the right kind of jobs” -- says they’re like “slavery”.
Lawd, give me strength……..
@ doriangrey:
It flew once, about 70 feet over the water, but it did
fly for about a mile.
Ok,if it did Michelles “Lets Move” workout it
would still be flying.
Better?
@ MacDuff:
His name is Jaws! I am laughing my ass off!
@ MacDuff:
Don’t let that throw you. I have have heard
guys with NFL contracts compare themselves to
slaves.
Rodan wrote:
Ha we are The Outsiders.
@ Speranza:
Maybe I’ll start rolling my pack of smokes up in my t-shirt sleeve…
//
Bumr50 wrote:
<———-- Vlaams Belang sniper… Vlaams Belang sniper…
Speranza wrote:
The problem is that young people that enter college
are subject to brainwashing beginning the first week.
They start to accept the profs view & peer pressure
is strong.
Young Republican chapters are fairly small, but I view
them as independent, strong kids.
RIX wrote:
I’m happy to do that: Hey, guys—compared to slave, you are pussies. Yeah, you heard me.
MacDuff wrote:
Working at Wal-Mart is like slavery??? Good grief!! Does the guy even have a high school diploma for the ‘right’ kind of job??
RIX wrote:
“Slave” is like “Nazi” -- when it’s the knee-jerk description of everything that annoys you, it becomes watered down and Slavers become the same the same as the SS and eventually are the same as the dude in the blue vest saying “welcome to Wal-Mart”. Sam Walton becomes indistinguishable fro Adolph Hitler.
MikeA wrote:
We should be so lucky.
If obama loses the election and is out of office, he be an anti-american gadfly that jimmy carter wished he could be in his wettest dreams.
buzzsawmonkey wrote:
Yeah, a field slave would kick an NFL linebacker’s ass pretty effectively, and probably had a better moral compass, to boot.
@ MacDuff:
You just described Charles Johnson’s world view. he thinks everyone is a Nazi!
MacDuff wrote:
All the slots for gang-bangers or crack-hoes otherwise filled, and are a benefit to the community?
@ citizen_q:
He would be so much worse than Carter. Streets will be named after him, monuments built, the whole nine yards and that is after the riots.
@ RIX:
The GOP needs to reach out more. Instead they tend to insult the youth. It wasn’t always like this.
Rodan wrote:
He’s the “Nazi Whisperer”
@ MacDuff:
Yes he’s the greatest Nazi Hunter ever! He has single handily prevented the 4th Reich from being born!
Rodan wrote:
The yoots?
Rodan wrote:
They need guest speakers at frat houses & sorority
houses etc. Liquor would be a draw, but you can’t
have minors drinking, bad pub.
Young people in college or working are all about
“freedom” The GOP has to position themselves as the
Party of Freedom & spell it out.
@ RIX:
Bingo exactly! To young people the GOP is the party of grouchy judgmental control freaks. That is how they perceive the GOP. Now back in the 80′s young people thought the GOP as cool people who drove nice cars and got hot chicks. That changed in 92 when the GOP decided to launch a war on pop culture.
@ Rodan:
Yeah, the GOP has got to get that back.
Also they need to repeat over & over, ad naseum
that the Dems are using & direspecting womens
intellect.
@ RIX:
@ Rodan:
Y’all may be putting the cart before the horse.
Young people, as whole, follow fashion. Reagan was popular with young people because he was a cultural phenomenon and Republicans were “in” because they were a majority.
Laugh if you like, but I’d like to see Greg Gutfield on Fox News Primetime as a counter to “The Daily Show”. The dude espouses good conservative/libertarian ideas and entertains at the same time.
@ MacDuff:
Gutfield imo is actually funnier.
But I really think that emphasising freedom
for the FRepublicans is the way tgo go.
Make the case that Dems believe in coersion
and they are corrupt.
@ MacDuff:
Plus back in the 80′s the image of a Republican was usually some hip yuppie making money and going on exotic vacations. The Michael J Fox Character from Family Ties was what people thought of Republicans. Then when Dan Quayle in 92 began attacking Murphy Brown and Republicans became obsessed with family values, it turned young people off. When I entered HS in 89, it was cool to be a Republican. When I graduated in 93, being a Republican meant you some angry old scrooge. That image has stuck.
I agree! We need to take back the popular culture!
Granny Jan and Jihad Kitty are ready for Obama to go!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=OCFxVTuTaF8
@ Rodan:
@ RIX:
Getting rid of the RINO “leadership” would be a great start.
Speaking of “yoots”, the hottest young star in Hollywood has a refreshingly anti-Hollywood attitude:
‘HUNGER GAMES’ STAR JENNIFER LAWRENCE: ‘SCREW PETA’
Oh, did I mention she’s a fellow Louisvillian?
@ MacDuff:
Liberals recoil in horror if you say FOX news. They think it’s for mental midgets. The snobbery of the ‘egalitarian’ left knows no bounds.
@ Rodan:
I think that it MUST be done via example, rather any proactive attempt to try and be “cool.”
If we could just elect reasonable and intelligent individualists, this wouldn’t be an issue.
The RNC and many state Republican committees seem to want to isolate and exile folks like that, though.
@ RIX:
Did you say ‘Moochelle’. Dressed up for Easter:
http://js-kit.com/blob/N27mPxr4YqLkvS2J2v8BTk.jpg
yenta-fada wrote:
They also, for the most part, have never seen it—nor have they listened to Limbaugh or any of the attitude pundits like Hannity or O’Reilly or Beck.
In short, they’ve been told these people are evil and shun them on a secondhand recommendation; they do not dare/deign to use their own minds.
yenta-fada wrote:
The Perpetual Scowl of the Incompetent Supervisor™—Easter Version!
Bumr50 wrote:
Maybe getting rid of DINO (commie) leadership would be even better.
yenta-fada wrote:
Someone’s in the kitchen with DINOs
Someone’s in the kitchen, I know-ow-ow-ow
Someone’s in the kitchen with DINOs
Giving tips to Biden, Joe…
Bumr50 wrote:
<
True.
buzzsawmonkey wrote:
That phrase is a pearl.
@ buzzsawmonkey:
The left does not require proof of their intellectual position. They do more research when picking out a brand of low fat yoghurt.
@ Bumr50:
They engage in those stupid culture wars and they RNC appeals to some of the lowest elements in American society. They really need a PR firm.
Case in point, I was with a bunch of my Colombian and Chilean relatives yesterday. Politics came up and they were trashing the GOP and the Democrats equally. They called the Democrats Communists and the GOP a bunch of Klansmen. I brought up Obamacare and boy that got them riled up. I was able to get them at least to agree because of that issue to vote against Obama. These people are very Rightwing, yet hate the GOP with a passion.
Like I said, the GOP needs a PR firm.
@ buzzsawmonkey:
DINO won’t you STOP blowing your horn?
After the 2012 election, I hope that Michelle
Obamas “Let’s Move” has a literal meaning.
Don’t forget Mother Robinson, I’ll take tbe dog.
Rodan wrote:
Ah, but a PR firm would not appeal to Dominicans, or Cubans, or Mexicans…
@ Rodan:
Israel needs a PR firm too.
yenta-fada wrote:
I’ve been fightin’ high-speed railroads, all the livelong day…
@ buzzsawmonkey:
Ha ha ha ha !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
OMG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
OK, a Brazilian firm! Who can hate Brazilians!
@ yenta-fada:
Boy aint that the truth!
@ Rodan:
Just how many is a brazilian?
Rodan wrote:
Brazillian? You mean like a Pubic Relations firm?
Rodan wrote:
First, the GOP needs to raise a brazillion dollars. Then it needs to understand how to spend it wisely.
@ MacDuff:
@ NoThreat2U:
Buzzsaw said a PR firm would not appeal to Dominicans, or Cubans, or Mexicans…. PR is short hand for Puerto Rican! Its a joke a Puerto Rican firm would not appeal to these groups. So my joke was Brazilians would.
Who can hate Brazilians!
@ NoThreat2U:
Brazilians are very expensive nowadays!
@ buzzsawmonkey:
Charles Johnson can consult them on that!
BBL!
@ Rodan:
I hear Brazilians are painful too.
@ Rodan:
They’re nuts!
Rodan wrote:
Yes, as I said Pubic Relations…….
NoThreat2U wrote:
Sexist! lol lol
@ MacDuff:
@ yenta-fada:
Hahahahahahaha I think my nut has finally cracked. I am soooo bored today…nothing better to do then crack jokes.
Good quote, no linky. Byron York:
“In 1996 Congress passed the Defense of Marriage Act by huge bipartisan votes — 342 to 67 in the House and 85 to 14 in the Senate. President Bill Clinton signed the measure into law. Now, the Obama administration says DOMA, which permits states to refuse to recognize gay marriages from other states and also creates a federal definition of marriage as the union of one man and one woman, is unconstitutional. … ‘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 Monday about the arguments over Obamacare before the nation’s highest court. The danger presented in the health care case, the president continued, is that ‘an unelected group of people would somehow overturn a duly constituted and passed law.’ … If the president was so concerned about a court overturning a duly constituted law passed by a democratically elected Congress, why was he urging a small group of unelected judges to strike down DOMA, a measure that won passage by a far greater margin than Obamacare? The answer is, of course, that the administration is making a political argument for its positions, not a legal one. … [T]he timing of the arguments over Obamacare and DOMA has revealed the flexibility of the administration’s arguments over constitutionality. And the flap over Obama’s remarks is just a preview of what is coming when the court issues its decision on Obamacare this June.” –columnist Byron York
7$ a gallon gas this summer? Does anyone think it will go that high?
http://video.foxnews.com/v/1553781800001/7-a-gallon-for-regular-gas
NoThreat2U wrote:
White House b-balls have Ozero’s face on them:
http://www.whitehousedossier.com/2012/04/09/white-house-basketballs-emblazoned-image/
@ yenta-fada:
Let me break it down for you…if Barak wants something overturned, it is a dire necessity because obviously it was wrong to pass it in the first place. Barack knows best. But when the SCOTUS wants to overturn something the HE created with his own two hands, they aren’t worth the respect due them because again, Barak knows best.
@ yenta-fada:
obama will throw whatever he can at the wall to make it stick that the Supreme Court knocking down obamacare is unconstitutional.
Or that Republicans are against people having healthcare.
yenta-fada wrote:
Not to mention that the President’s announced intention, last year, to refuse to enforce DOMA, was completely extra-legal and beyond his capacity to do.
However, NPR—always a useful source of insight into the proggie mindset—has been going on about the terrible disabilities being faced by same-sex couples who can file joint returns in states that have agreed to create same-sex marriage, but who must file separate returns at the federal level because DOMA is still on the books and the federal government does not recognize same-sex marriage.
In short, it is clear that Obama’s statement that he would not enforce DOMA was intended to create a specious grounds for and “equal protection” lawsuit that would void DOMA without either the Congress having to repeal it or he himself having to go on record signing its repeal.
@ yenta-fada:
This is so over the top it is unreal. When obama was first elected as president my niece’s biology book had a picture of the obama family in the front of the book. He has to have his face on everything.
So unpresidental it is mind-boggling.
Lily wrote:
It will hurt him in the end. Americans love branding, but they get bored easily.
The constant exposure to Brand Barack and Brand Michelle is, I think, starting to wear a little with the public. That show Barky and Snarky on the DC Snore is so last season.
Lily wrote:
How about when he created the office of the “President Elect”
He even had a seal. Where is that in the Constitution?
Lily wrote:
As lungfish crawling out of the primordial sea of Chicago corruption?
@ RIX:
Not in the Constitution. Of course hasn’t that seal fell a couple times too? Hopefully that is a good sign.
He has crossed the lines so many times of what a president should do that it is nothing hubris at this point now and I hope his hubris is his downfall.
@ buzzsawmonkey:
I had not thought about it until you discussed how important the gay agenda is in all of this. We have about 1 million people show up to watch and participate in the annual Gay Parade. The only campaigner for mayor to bring his (adopted) kid to a press conference was a gay man. Demonizing normality is the norm.
buzzsawmonkey wrote:
Good one!
buzzsawmonkey wrote:
Heh. Even she didn’t understand why that was in her book (college level not high school).
I know that there are a lot of young people not happy with obama and the only ones I know that are extremely liberal are on the West Coast.
Even my nephew who listens to NPR says in San Francisco it goes over the line. But will he vote against obama who knows, I doubt it. The other young people are certainly not happy with him.
Lily wrote:
The Presidential Seal has been so embarrassed at having to front for Obama that it has at least twice tried to commit suicide by jumping.
@ Lily:
Young people like to drive. $6/gallon gas in November simply won’t cut it.
My worry is, what will he (Obama) do to fix that?
Obama is the first president to have his own logo….which makes him a virtual product. Isn’t that like slavery?
yenta-fada wrote:
The same-sex marriage campaign is intended to destroy traditional religion and traditional family life. The gay-rights movement, post-Stonewall, was built on the objective of destroying marriage—and at no time has the gay-rights movement accounted for the sudden switch of marriage being the must-destroy objective to being the must-have objective. And the media, of course, do not do anything to inquire about this.
Meanwhile, note that this mural in this Providence school is at risk because the student artist—God-forbid!—actually portrayed a married opposite-sex couple.
buzzsawmonkey wrote:
Did you see the Four Questions of the Seder re-framed by Democrats using Obama in them?
http://www.njdc.org/blog/post/4questions
yenta-fada wrote:
Hurl.
@ Lily:
Obama had his “Office of the President Elect” across the
street in the Federal Center from where I used to office.
There is a really great Jewish deli about a mile or so
South. Maneys
Obama like a lot of people really likes the food.
But when he felt the urge, he would get into a limo in an
actual motorcade to the place, shutting down a lot
of the South Loop.
What an arrogant %$*#!
@ buzzsawmonkey:
Intimidate the kids. Brutal. Souless.
@ RIX:
You have to be kidding? Why doesn’t he send someone to get it for him instead of the dog and pony show of a motorcade and snarling up traffic for the little people trying to get home? He honestly doesn’t care for anyone except the one in the mirror.
buzzsawmonkey wrote:
Nothing sacred.
RIX wrote:
Keeping people from the Deli. IMPEACH. I bet everyone who is inconvenienced personally by Dear Leader is growing a grudge.
@ Lily:
It was at lunch time & you are right, why didn’t
he send someone. Heck Manys would haved delivered.
Imo it was just hubris, to get noticed & feel
important.
RIX wrote:
Manny’s is really good—and will, hopefully, still be good even after Obama is forgotten.
It is, alas, not kosher but merely kosher-style. It is one of the few remnants of the old Jewish Maxwell Street ghetto neighborhood (home to Benny Goodman, Art Buchwald, and Kirk Douglas, among others) which has been destroyed by the University of Illinois at Chicago (formerly the “Chicago Circle Campus”) which is the longtime stomping ground of one Bill Ayers, part of the education faculty.
@ yenta-fada:
I will say this for him, he does appreciate a good
deli.
Other than nthat I can’t think of a thing.
@ RIX:
That is exactly what it is. To make a show of him getting his lunch.
He hates staying in the White House.
RIX wrote:
Or, he is simply accustomed to meeting Ayers at the best place to eat near Ayers’ office.
@ buzzsawmonkey:
You’re right, Mannys isn’t actually Kosher.
But huge , great sandwiches.
Along with Billy Goats, it is a Chicago icon.
Lily wrote:
The White House reminds him at every turn of the nation he despises, and its history of which he is largely ignorant and derisive.
Of course he hates it there.
@ Lily:
Or since this is in Chicago staying at the office and actually you know do work.
buzzsawmonkey wrote:
That’s true, that little pecker Ayers was a prof
at the University of Illinois at Chicago, right
down the street.
Lily wrote:
He is a bum,with no work ethic.
He has never had to,things were handed to him.
@ RIX:
The Manny’s countermen cut corned beef better than anyone in New York—and they use seeded rye, which you can’t get in NYC.
They also serve chocolate phosphates. You might think that chocolate syrup and seltzer water is a gross combo with a corned-beef sandwich, but you’d be completely wrong. A Manny’s corned-beef sandwich, with a potato pancake and a chocolate phosphate on the side (and, if you’re really a glutton for punishment, a bowl of soup with either matzo balls or kreplach)—heaven.
Lily wrote:
He doesn’t have the discipline to even do physical exercise. I can throw a baseball better than he can, and dance, and probably, golf.(or could at his age) He is lazy. How does he stay so thin? It’s a mystery. He wouldn’t even golf if he had to do it without a cart.
See ya. I will try to be here tomorrow for our
regularly scheduled Obama bashing.
@ RIX:
It shows too. I do hope he keeps opening his mouth to expose this ignorance though. Even though people around him will tell him not to say something he will anyway. He is surrounding by yes people.
@ buzzsawmonkey:
There is no decent deli in Toronto. None.
yenta-fada wrote:
On the other hand, the Royal Ontario Museum is superb.
RIX wrote:
Every day brings new gaffes. Bye.
buzzsawmonkey wrote:
Not a substitute. lol. (history/shmistory)/
@ buzzsawmonkey:
Always great deals at Canadian Tire!!
yenta-fada wrote:
Hey, not only does the ROM have some really great exhibits of Japanese sword-furniture, but its general armor section shows how things are actually made! That’s a quality of exhibit not to be sneezed at.
buzzsawmonkey wrote:
I have not seen that section. It’s a great museum. They messed up the architecture with the reno, imo. Water was getting into the Asian antiques galleries. My fave.
Lily wrote:
Does anyone think it wont…
@ doriangrey:
Bush did it.
////
8)
Baby Doc Baraq == “Jethro Bodine” of Constitutional Law.
@ doriangrey:
Point taken!
Good grief! I am sure the Republicans and the oil companies will be at fault!!
@ Lily:
Why that guys popularity is as high as it is, is baffling.
Speranza wrote:
Not if you begin with the assumption that a sizable percentage (perhaps approaching or even over 50%) of the American population is simply ignorant of history, the mechanisms of our government, the U.S. Constitution, and/or political philosophy for a myriad of reasons.
@ Bumr50:
and s sizable portion is dependent on the Federal government.