Apparently Barry Hussein Soetoro is doing his job so well as the presumed president of the United States of America (presumed because his legitimacy is still in question) that he has time to tell a legitimate body of government ( his appointments excluded) how to conduct it’s affairs. (see story)Those fact s notwithstanding, what is so striking about the president’s remarks is how apparent it has become to all citizens of the United States, to all Chicago thuggery and to all prison inmates across this country that this presumed president is attempting to make the Supremes his bitches. That is why he chastises them so often and so publicly.
You would think that a Constitutional lecturer (Soetoro was never a law Professor) would know that the Supreme Court is an equal branch to the Legislative and the Executive branches of the United States government. The Supremes’ job is to decide whether laws within a case or cases brought before it comply with the Constitution of the United States of America.
Justices are supposed to be fair and unbiased judges of constitutionally. They are not supposed to be swayed by the partisan carping of a politically insecure president, be he legitimate or be he not. Nor should the court be ideologically influenced hence their lifetime appointments.
The reality is both of the president’s Supreme Court appointments Sonia Sotomeyer and Elena Kagan were placed on the court for their progressive ideological views rather than their judicial acumen or their commitment to Constitutional principles. For example, Justice Kagan who was the solicitor general for the Soetoro administration when they were beginning to plan their defense of this health care law is in clear conflict of interest yet she hasn’t the legal ethics to recuse herself from the case. Seems these days judges or justices are selected for their ideological fealty rather than unbiased dedication to law or the constitution.
Moreover, in the media there is continued talk about a partisan split on the court between Progressive and Conservatives. If what the media reports is true then the house of the United States has fallen, it is a political and social house divided. Justices Sotomeyer’s and Kagan’s primarily function on the court is to fortify that ideological breach rather than adjudicate constitutionally.
Those fact s notwithstanding, what is so striking about the president’s recent remarks regarding the Supreme court is how apparent it has became to all citizens of the United States, to all Chicago thuggery and to all prison inmates across this country that this presumed president is attempting to make the Supremes his bitches. That is why he chastises them so often and so publicly.
This president shows unprecedented contempt for the Supreme Court. That fact was on full display for the nation to see January 2010 when the president dressed the Justices down in a national viewed bi-cameral meeting. What had the court done? It ruled in a way that presumed president didn’t agree with.
In a 5-4 ruling, in the Citizens United v. FEC case the court ruled to strike down a key campaign-finance provision. The presumed president’s response;
"With all due deference to separation of powers, last week the Supreme Court reversed a century of law that I believe will open the floodgates for special interests, including foreign corporations, to spend without limit in our elections.
Well, I don't think American elections should be bankrolled by America's most powerful interests, or worse, by foreign entities." --President Barry Hussein Soetoro
Well, I don't think American elections should be bankrolled by America's most powerful interests, or worse, by foreign entities." --President Barry Hussein Soetoro
The presumed president’s unveiled threats against the Supreme court were so brazen that an Appellate court has responded ordering the administration to answer whether it believes that the Supreme court is within its constitutional role to rule on the constitutionality of the health care law. (see story)
The presumed president’s remarks in their entirely are below:
"I actually continue to be confident that the Supreme Court will uphold the law. And the reason is, because in accordance with precedent out there, it's constitutional.
"That's not just my opinion by the way. That's the opinion of legal experts across the ideological spectrum, including two very conservative appellate court justices that said this wasn't even a close case."
"I think it's important -- because I watched some of the commentary last week -- to remind people that this is not an abstract argument. People's lives are affected by the lack of availability of healthcare, the inaffordability of healthcare, their inability to get healthcare because of preexisting conditions.
"The law that's already in place has already given 2.5 million young people healthcare that wouldn't otherwise have it. There are tens of thousands of adults with preexisting conditions who have healthcare right now because of this law. Parents don't have to worry about their children not being able to get healthcare because they can't be prevented from getting healthcare as a consequence of a preexisting condition. That is part of this law.
"Millions of seniors are paying less for prescription drugs because of this law. Americans all across the country have greater rights and protections with respect to the insurance companies, and are getting preventive care because of this law.
"So, that's just the part that's already been implemented. That doesn't speak to the 30 million people who stand to gain coverage once it's fully implemented in 2014.
"And I think it's important, I think the American people understand and I think the justices should understand that in the absence of an individual mandate, you cannot have a mechanism to ensure that people with preexisting conditions can actually get healthcare.
"So there's not only an economic element to this and a legal element to this but there's a human element to this, and I hope that's not forgotten in this political debate. 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 this court will recognize that and not take that step."
"I'm confident this will be upheld because it should be upheld. And again, that's not just my opinion, that's the opinion of a whole lot of constitutional law professors and academics and judges and lawyers who've examined this law, even if they're not particularly sympathetic to this particular piece of legislation or my presidency."
The president’s remarks are political sophistry at its absolute worst. His words reek of the scent of healthcare snake oil sold for medical cures by a roadside huckster. This unconstitutional healthcare law is the lemon that the lemon laws were enacted to enforce against.
The American people were sold a lemon in Obamacare. We all know it. The American people want nothing more than to take this lemon back to the dealer and get our money back. We’ve had enough of roadside hucksters telling the American people to swallow the snake oil of Obamacare. We’ve had enough of the government telling us that what they tell us to do is for our own good whether we like it or we want it or not.
According to the founders of this country, our government was instituted in a triad form for the purpose of checks and balances. When two branches of our government act unconstitutionally as the Congress and the President has in passing Obamacare, the Judiciary was designed to check them for the sake of the American people.
That is why the Supremes will strike down Obamacare, it is unconstitutional, and we all know it.
Finally, if we no longer have a government that will protect and defend the constitution we have disappointed Benjamin Franklin and the rest of America’s founders. Though it’s taken over two hundred years to lost it we have shown that we could not keep what the founders bequeathed to us when they gave us a constitutional republic. That is if we let stand any unconstitutional law, which Progressives in both the Democrat and Republican Parties including the president put forth.
No matter what the president says, Obamacare is unconstitutional. The Supremes must strike it down. We all know that it is. What we don’t know is whether there is remaining an American institution that will uphold the Constitution of the United States of America in the way that it is intended to be protected and defended.
