Speaking Freely

by

As many have heard the President has come under attack for comments he made, and then slightly backed off from, to and about SCOTUS.  Now if you think I am going to jump on that band wagon, you are mistaken.

I have no problem with the President saying whatever he likes.  There is still a 1st Amendment and he as well as the next person has the right to exercise that right.  The other reason I have no problem with his “talking points” is the more he opens his mouth the more ignorance he presents to the population.

What I do have problems with is the lies and misrepresentations he offers as “facts”.  So let’s look at part of his statement the other day.

I am confident 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 (sic),” President Obama said.  There are a number of problems with this statement.  First off a strong majority of congress was less than 10 votes.  It was directly along the democrats party line.  Then when sent back was “deemed passed” in a legal, but dubious parliamentary maneuver.  The law has never had majority support in the Country and has loss support since it was passed.  By the way, overturning unconstitutional laws IS the SCOTUS’s primary job.

“…an unelected group of people would somehow overturn a duly constituted and passed law”  Again, the problem is the President’s loose tongue and mis-stating facts.  First off, that is called indirect representation.  Until it was screwed it up with the 17th Amendment it is how Senators were put in office.  The State Congress of the individual States would, along with the Governor, to appoint 2 men to represent the State’s Rights.  The President being elected suggest an individual to the Court.  The suggestion goes to the Senate, (now also elected), for advice and consent.  Bingo, indirect representation.  The second problem is, as I stated above the law was pushed through at midnight with a parliamentary  procedure.

As I said, we are confident this will be over — this will be upheld. I am confident this will be upheld because it should be upheld. And again, that is not just my opinion. That is the opinion of a whole lot of constitutional law professors and academics and judges and lawyers who have examined this law, even if they’re not particularly sympathetic to this piece of legislation or my presidency,” he said.

I am sure that there are numerous travelers of yours who agree with you, but that hardly seems to be to majority opinion.  It certainly isn’t the opinion of the majority of Americans who, at some 70% believe the law unconstitutional.  And he is welcome to his opinion of course but it certainly cast a great deal of doubt over the claim that the President is a Constitutional Scholar.  Don’t forget that the legal heads of 26 States, (I know that’s not half of the 57 States but it’s close), joined in on this suit.

To hear the President try to lay claim that the “human aspect” of the law should weigh into the consideration is as lame as lame can get.  The human cost, the financial cost has NOTHING, let me repeat that, NOTHING what-so-ever to do with the Constitutionality of the law.  And that my friends is exactly the reason the law is in court.

chas
“Tyranny elected is tyranny none the less”

Advertisements

4 Responses to “Speaking Freely”

  1. olinl Says:

    My sentiments, exactly, Chas. What is the purpose of SCOTUS if not to hear challenges to Congressionally passed laws? Congress does not have heavenly powers or perception. And activist judges are those that rule from their personal philosophy as opposed to a strict interpretation of the Constitution. That is what has got us in the mess we are in now. It is not the power or purpose of SCOTUS to create legislation.

    • chas Says:

      Nor is it to allow Congress to disregard the limits to their power. And that is exactly what this case is about, not as Obama claims making new law from the bench which is what activist Judges do.

      chas

  2. Eileen Emberger Says:

    good points

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: