Obama confused about what the Judiciary really does?

#2
#2
“The truth is, that, even with the most secure tenure of office, during good behavior, the danger is not, that the judges will be too firm in resisting public opinion, and in defence of private rights or public liberties; but, that they will be ready to yield themselves to the passions, and politics, and prejudices of the day.” —
Justice Joseph Story, who served from 1811 to 1845


ScottFactor.com Conservative Blog

Of course we should not be surprised at anything that comes out of his mouth, but comments this week by Barack Obama (or whatever his name is) were simply stunning. Not only were they stunning, but they were chilling. When he issued a thinly veiled threat to the Supreme Court concerning their ruling on the atrocious Obamacare legislation, we saw a brazen, boorish, wanna-be dictator showing his ugly, arrogant face.

obama%20chin%20up.jpg


Here is part of what he said,

“Ultimately, 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. And I’d just remind conservative commentators that for years what we’ve heard is, the biggest problem on the bench was judicial activism or a lack of judicial restraint — that an unelected group of people would somehow overturn a duly constituted and passed law. Well, this is a good example. And I’m pretty confident that this Court will recognize that and not take that step.”

Lies. There is nothing “unprecedented” about the Supreme Court overturning unconstitutional legislation. They have been doing it for over 200 years. He lies about the definition of “judicial activism.” Judicial activism is a very real problem in our nation, and it has been a problem for many years now. Judicial activism occurs when judges depart from constitutional law and create new laws contrary to the Constitution, and that happens all too often. Judges who uphold the Constitution are not judicial activists, but of course, Obama never lets the truth get in the way of his outrageous assertions.

Speaking of outrageous assertions, did you hear what Obama said about the Paul Ryan GOP budget?

As reported by Real Clear Politics,

“We wouldn't have the capacity to enforce the laws that protect the air we breathe, the water we drink, or the food that we eat. Cuts to the FAA would likely result in more flight cancellations, delays and the complete elimination of air traffic control services in parts of the country. Over time, our weather forecasts would become less accurate because we wouldn't be able to afford to launch new satellites and that means governors and mayors would have to wait longer to order evacuations in the event of a hurricane. That's just a partial sampling of the consequences of this budget.”

This is simply breathtaking. This man has never met a lie he is not willing to tell. Absolutely nothing in that statement is true. There is no government agency or program that could not stand budget cuts—even huge budget cuts. If we could truly analyze the waste and redundancy and then eliminate them, we would be amazed at the money we could save while still having good weather forecasting, air traffic control services and air, food and water safety. Give me a break, Obama! He sounds desperate.

But, is he really desperate? When you consider the hot-mic, “after my election, I will have more flexibility” remarks he recently made to Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, it would seem that Obama is quite confident that he will be “reelected.”

We may wonder how he can be so sure of himself. There is no doubt that Obama is unpopular, despite the “polling results” being constantly released by Obama-fawning media outlets that show close to half the nation approves of his terrible, treasonous performance in office.

obamaillegalmaps.jpg


As Judicial Watch reported on Monday,

“This appears to be part of the Obama Administration’s bigger plan to blow off Congress by using its executive powers to grant illegal immigrants backdoor amnesty. The plan has been in the works for years and in 2010 Texas’s largest newspaper published an exposé about a then-secret DHS initiative that systematically cancelled pending deportations. The remarkable program stunned the legal profession and baffled immigration attorneys who said the government bounced their clients’ deportation even when expulsion was virtually guaranteed.


In late 2011 a mainstream newspaper obtained internal Homeland Security documents outlining “sweeping changes” in immigration enforcement that halt the deportation of illegal aliens with no criminal records. This also includes a nationwide “training program” to assure that enforcement agents and prosecuting attorneys don’t remove illegal immigrants who haven’t been convicted of crimes.”

Many are unconvicted because they are turned over to ICE after being arrested for various crimes before being arraigned in local courts. ICE turns them loose pending a hearing which may take years and some simply disapear, without ever being charged with the crime they originally commited that resulted in an arrest.

Talk about a revolving door.

“The danger to America is not Barack Obama, but a citizenry capable of entrusting a man like him with the presidency. It will be easier to limit and undo the follies of an Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense and good judgment to an electorate willing to have such a man for their president. The problem is much deeper and far more serious than Mr. Obama, who is a mere symptom of what ails us. Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince. The republic can survive a Barack Obama. It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools such as those who made him their president”
Anon (Possibly a writer from the Czech Republic)
 
#3
#3
“The truth is, that, even with the most secure tenure of office, during good behavior, the danger is not, that the judges will be too firm in resisting public opinion, and in defence of private rights or public liberties; but, that they will be ready to yield themselves to the passions, and politics, and prejudices of the day.” —
Justice Joseph Story, who served from 1811 to 1845


ScottFactor.com Conservative Blog



obamaillegalmaps.jpg




Many are unconvicted because they are turned over to ICE after being arrested for various crimes before being arraigned in local courts. ICE turns them loose pending a hearing which may take years and some simply disapear, without ever being charged with the crime they originally commited that resulted in an arrest.

Talk about a revolving door.

“The danger to America is not Barack Obama, but a citizenry capable of entrusting a man like him with the presidency. It will be easier to limit and undo the follies of an Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense and good judgment to an electorate willing to have such a man for their president. The problem is much deeper and far more serious than Mr. Obama, who is a mere symptom of what ails us. Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince. The republic can survive a Barack Obama. It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools such as those who made him their president”
Anon (Possibly a writer from the Czech Republic)

Great post. Especially the last paragraph. I for the life of me cannot understand how anyone could support such an idiot. It would be funny, if it was not so sad.
 
#4
#4
Great post. Especially the last paragraph. I for the life of me cannot understand how anyone could support such an idiot. It would be funny, if it was not so sad.

I think every thinking person shares your concern.

The fact that two thirds of the American people oppose Obamacare gives me hope that some have woken up to the facts of life.

whkoolaid.jpg



“In the end the Party would announce that two and two made five, and you would have to believe it. It was inevitable that they should make that claim sooner or later: the logic of their position demanded it. Not merely the validity of experience, but the very existence of external reality, was tacitly denied by their philosophy. The heresy of heresies was common sense. And what was terrifying was not that they would kill you for thinking otherwise, but that they might be right. For, after all, how do we know that two and two make four? Or that the force of gravity works? Or that the past is unchangeable? If both the past and the external world exist only in the mind, and if the mind itself is controllable—what then?”
- George Orwell, _1984_

biden_say_obama_cant_diss_supreme_court.jpg



Island Turtle: Why did Judge Smith lecture Obama? Because he simply ignored a court order the judge had approved.

Indirectly the President was challenging the entire judiciary and it struck a raw nerve with Judge Jerry Smith, of the 5th Circuit Appeals Court. Judge Smith had, less than two years earlier rejected, in a 2 to 1 decision, the Interior Department request to stay a lower court order lifting the offshore drilling moratorium (Hornbeck Offshore Services LLC v. Salazar) – thus requiring the moratorium lifted.

In one of the most blatant examples thumbing its nose at the courts, the administration simply ignored that order. After the administration’s appeal was rejected, they rescinded the original moratorium order (ostensibly complying with the court), but almost immediately after, replaced it with another essentially identical order, affecting precisely the same rigs in the first order. When the second moratorium was lifted in October, still no drilling permits were being issued.

The original judge of the 5th Circuit, Martin Feldman landed on the administration three and a half months later. He issued a contempt citation against Secretary of the Interior, Ken Salazar citing a “determined disregard” of his order. And he added to the insult by requiring Interior to pay Hornbeck’s legal fees.

Today Attorney General Eric Holder sent his single spaced, three page answer to Judge Smith on the Supreme Court’s ability to overturn legislation it has judged unconstitutional. We don’t know what it said, but it should have included:


Don’t piss off the judge
Don’t piss off the judge
Don’t piss off the judge

Holder also ended the letter with the non-sequitur “The President’s remarks were fully consistent with the principles described herein.”

To wit: “2+2=5”.

dem_jackasses.jpg
 

VN Store



Back
Top