For the second time in two years President Obama is embarassing the Presidency with Chicago-style thuggery politics.
Back in 2010 Obama, during the State of the Union address, attacked the Supreme Court's decision on campaign finance. Most voters know that this President's malignant narcissism forces him into trying to provoke and manipulate those who disagree with his positions or Chicago politics. He truly believes his grandiose legislation should turn into irrevocable actions by anyone.
He made this statement at that State of the Union address.
Last week, the Supreme Court reversed a century of law to open the floodgates for special interests — including foreign corporations — to spend without limit in our elections," Obama said. "Well I don’t think American elections should be bankrolled by America’s most powerful interests, or worse, by foreign entities. They should be decided by the American people, and that’s why I’m urging Democrats and Republicans to pass a bill that helps to right this wrong."
Justice Alito promptly rejected his statement during the Address by mouthing "It's not true." The President has a Supreme Court Justice tell him he is misleading or lying to the people.
The American Thinker wrote this assessment on Obamacare.
Obama is going for the "nuclear option" to force very bad and very toxic medicine down our throats. He is willing to sacrifice his congressional majorities to get the biggest, most budget-busting entitlement ever imagined into the permanent fabric of American national life. The main beneficiaries of Obamacare will be Obama's ego and the Permanent Left.
This is his chance to be FDR, and he can't control his need for that glorified image. He is therefore crossing the Rubicon -- making an irreversible decision that will define his presidency forever, win or lose. This is not just another grandiose gesture. Obama now stands revealed for what he is.
On Tuesday President Barack Obama during an official Presidential visit took the opportunity to initiate an unsettling attack the Supreme Court once again.
“I’d just remind conservative commentators that for years what we’ve heard is the biggest problem on the bench is judicial activism or a lack of judicial restraint — that an unelected group of people would somehow overturn a duly constituted and passed law,” Obama said. “Well, here’s a good example. And I’m pretty confident that this court will recognize that, and not take that step.”
To be clear, I believe the individual mandate is both good policy and sound law, well within Congress’ powers under the Commerce Clause. I think overturning the mandate would be bad not only for the country but for the court itself. Especially in the wake of Bush v. Gore and Citizens United, it would look like a political act to have the five Republican-appointed justices voting to strike down the law and the four Democratic appointees voting to uphold it.
This President once taught constitutional law yet he violates one of its basic premises. It is not for the executive branch to interfere, bully, or manipulate the judicial branch. It didn't take long for this egregious attack to backfire.
Appeals Court Calls President's Bluff on Obamacare
President Barack Obama’s attack on the Supreme Court appeared to backfire
Tuesday, when the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals issued an order giving the
Justice Department until noon Thursday to state whether the administration truly
believes courts lack the authority to strike down mandates that they determine
On Monday, Obama said that striking down his
signature healthcare legislation would be an “unprecedented, extraordinary step”
and would demonstrate a lack of “judicial restraint” by the Supreme
He also pointed out that the nine Supreme Court justices are
unelected, suggesting that it would therefore be undemocratic for them to
overturn Obamacare, which narrowly eked through Congress by a seven vote margin
in the House of Representatives.
“This is liberals in shock over watching
their side being demolished in oral arguments,” Fox News commentator Charles
Krauthammer said Tuesday, pointing out the courts have had the authority to
strike down unconstitutional provisions for over 200 years. “And [they are]
trying to bully the Supreme Court into ending up on their side in a case which
they clearly had lost intellectually and logically.”
The order from the
5th Circuit for the Justice Department to clarify its position on judicial
authority came during a separate challenge to Obamacare brought by
As a Justice Department lawyer began arguing
the government’s case, Appeals Judge Jerry Smith interrupted the presentation to
ask if the 5th Circuit Court had the legal authority to strike down a law it
finds to be unconstitutional. CBS News reports that when the government lawyer
answered affirmatively, the judge stated that it was not clear to “many of us”
that the president agrees.
The three-judge panel then gave the Justice
Department until noon Thursday to provide a three-page letter clarifying whether
it believes courts have the authority to pass judgment on the constitutionality
Obama knows he is wrong but the narcissism prevents him from not being himself.