Greg Sargent:
To the fainting couch! Obama attacked the Supreme Court and threatened it with a backlash, should it strike down his tyrannical scheme to impose a government takeover of health care on the nation!
That’s what many conservative writers and even some centrist ones are arguing. They are saying that Obama’s words about the Court yesterday were “unsettling” and a “witch-hunt,” and they’re likening them to F.D.R.’s efforts to pack the Court in retaliation for decisions striking down New Deal initiatives.
Please. If what Obama said yesterday is an “attack,” it’s pretty timid stuff indeed.
If Villagers say you’re being uncivil, you’re winning.
Anyway, what with all the conservative SCOTUS justices who were drafted out of high-school (not to mention all the crazy right-wing federal judges appointed by), we’re going to be stuck with a lot of craziness from the judiciary for years to come. If these unelected hacks want to act as a purely political body and tarnish the reputation of the court forever, they have to expect a reaction. You play with matches, you get burned.
gwangung
Sticks and stones, bitches.
phil
What is our recourse? How do we even begin to undo the damage done by the Roberts court? It seems like the implosion of American confidence in institutions has finally reached critical mass – now what do we do with all this national angst and cynicism?
I think I need a prozac..
arguingwithsignposts
As I mentioned in an earlier thread, NPR used “campaign salvo” in their story this afternoon (audio not yet available), so it’s going to leave a mark.
Violet
Yes. This. Let’s keep it up.
patrick II
Burned how? They are lifetime appointments living in an informational, intellectual and economic cocoon that makes them essentially fireproof. Unless Faux News, The Federalist Society, or the Koch brothers show interest, they will just tell you to get the fck over it.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@phil:
By making sure President Romney doesn’t appoint at least three justices (Ginsberg, Scalia, Kennedy, I don’t think Thomas would take a chance on Hillary naming his replacement, and Breyer is not in the first blush of youth) from 2013-2016, with one eye on keeping Jim Demint happy and the bipartisan support of Manchin, Landrieu and if we’re lucky Claire McCaskill and Jon Tester.
chopper
if only. FDR running against the court is what helped get the new deal off the ground.
General Stuck (on self glorifiication)
A trio of 5th circuit appeals judges had a hissy fit and ordered the DOJ to state whether the president thought the courts could strike down laws as unconstitutional. All brats appointed by republicans, and which I wonder if they will require Judge Kennedy to state whether the ‘heavy burden’ to prove the ACA as constitutional is ass backwards from long standing jurisprudence. Obama clarified his remark to say what any one with a centilla of awareness of the situation would know,
Which is precisely correct, and Kennedy precisely wrong and stoopid for his dumbass quip. I swear, I think Obama is getting it, that this is a war, and he is all in, though with whatever decorum the wingnuts deserve as well as the lowest denominator for rules of engagement that they set.
beltane
@chopper: If the conservatives want to compare Obama with FDR who are we to complain.
So much for the old “Black Jimmy Carter” label.
Raven
I thought that sissy motherfucker Mornin Joe was going to faint over this.
PeakVT
@chopper: FDR ran against the court in ’36, not ’32.
Ben Franklin
Judicial review is not clearly defined in Article III.
Lithwick on Judicial Review
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2011/05/judicial_review_under_review.html
Linda Greenhouse-ditto
http://www.amphilsoc.org/sites/default/files/480104.pdf
Jeff Spender
Good Zoroaster. I want to see Obama take it to another level and just call them fuckin’ morons. That would stick right in Scalia’s craw. I know the Village would get the vapors and scream about decency or some other such nonsense that never really existed.
At this point, we might as well treat our politics as it is: a crappy pay-per-view wrestling match that’s all talk and no action. Obama should say, “I’mma open a can o’ Whoop Ass on you ‘Supreme Court’ wimps if you don’t act in accordance with established case law and precedent and affirm the constitutionality of my law.”
And then Scalia could bloviate about whatever.
I kind of lost my point. Hard not to when you’re dealing with such vapid commentary from the media.
Ocotillo
I don’t get where folks think these Federalist Society hacks give a flying you-know-what about what their reputation is. As long as they have the final say, Scalia will smirk and sneer “get over it”.
This is why we have to hold our nose and support DINOs like Bob Kerry who would be a royal pain in the ass but would not filibuster Obama nominees.
Bush v. Gore bitches……
J.W. Hamner
I think given the complete lack of (mainstream) backlash against Bush v. Gore, it’s a little silly to think that even a 5-4 partisan decision overturning a sitting President’s signature legislative accomplishment is going to tarnish the Roberts’ court’s rep with anybody but liberals and law academics. However I don’t think there is any reason not to hammer them for it… at the very least maybe our people in Congress will take the nominating process as the deadly serious business that it is and go no holds barred… and no liberal will ever utter the words “The two candidates are the same!!” without hearing “What about the Supreme Court you idiot?”
aimai
Jesus, its not even about Judicial Review, its about Stare Decisis which is the court’s own method of not acting like total lunatic assholes who change their mind every month with their underwear. Obama was 100 percent correct–the point about constitutional law is that its always got this schroedinger’s cat quality to it. Not one of those Justices, and certainly none of the right wing, can pretend that this isn’t boilerplate obvious.
aimai
dedc79
We have to remember that the super right wing religious fundamentalists now have their own law schools churning out lawyers who make Scalia sound like Richard Dawkins. During the Bush administration they funneled them right out of school into the federal government and there’s no reason to think that won’t happen again with a President Romney or Santorum
Gin & Tonic
Like I think I said yesterday, if you can’t stand a fast one high and inside, you have no business playing in the majors. And this wasn’t even a real brush-back, fer chrissake.
arguingwithsignposts
@dedc79: And the scary thing is that Liberty U. or Regent aren’t even the worst of the bunch. Check out a documentary about Patrick Henry. Those folks are the cold fusion of wingnut libertarianism and talevangelicalism.
Omnes Omnibus
I’m gonna have to leave my knife in your back.
dmsilev
Have the Villagers gone into their pearl-clutching mode over Obama’s speech today yet? If the President’s plan is to cause the Villagers to clutch at one set of pearls after another until the global oyster population goes to zero, I’m all for it.
Elizabelle
@dmsilev:
I didn’t like the clip the PBS Newshour showed; they did hit on the radical vision/Social Darwinism, but it was pretty short. Had expected more. Couldn’t watch all, so will check the website later for what the talking heads said.
geg6
@dmsilev:
Heh. Agreed. And I love oysters but would gladly give them up forever just to see this.
Elizabelle
@dmsilev:
I didn’t like the clip the PBS Newshour showed; they did hit on the radical vision/Social Darwinism, but it was pretty short. Had expected more. Couldn’t watch all, so will check the website later for what the talking heads said.
geg6
@dmsilev:
Heh. Agreed. And I love oysters but would gladly give them up forever just to see this.
David Koch
@dmsilev:
They’re waiting for the RNC to transmit the daily talking points.
sophronia
This is all a big setup. Get the media to explode with people talking about how Obama is “threatening” the Court, and now the judges look like wimps if they don’t overturn the ACA.
Just another case of the right wing trying to manipulate the media into getting the result they want.
arguingwithsignposts
@dmsilev:
Are the villagers ever not in their pearl-clutching mode?
Also, too: dammit, Cole, why can’t we have recent comments back?!
MikeJ
@arguingwithsignposts: Because one more query per page load brought the server to its sha na na na na na na knees, knees.
tirgrain
What stops the Supreme Court from being really nutty? Say, striking down the ACA and also striking down lots of other stuff in the process? Like Medicare and Medicaid, and so on?
And if the mandate is struck down, doesn’t that mean Ryan’s Medicare voucher scheme is dead in the water too?
Is there an end state to really nutty, crazy behavior from the court? At some point, don’t they get themselves impeached? Or worse, completely ignored, when they cause a constitutional crisis, or a state of war between the branches of government?
Even they must know that some decisions and orders they make wouldn’t be followed… like ordered US Marshal’s to summarily arrest people or whatever right?
David Koch
I remember when Tom Delay attacked the Supreme Court for declining to hear appeals on the Terry Schiavo case — the Village didn’t say one word.
Classic IOKIYAR
piratedan
@arguingwithsignposts: well they also have their “false equivalency” mode, there is also “tut-tutting-heh, indeed” mode, as well as, the “it would be irresponsible to speculate” mode and their idle status of concern troll mode. There may be others but I’m still pretty new at this.
I assume that there’s whole other jargon used for this, kinda like how the grifters talk in those Ocean movies….
arguingwithsignposts
@MikeJ:
In this day and age, it’s not an excuse. What was always my prob. with page loads was all the ads and the javascript from the actblue stuff. YMMV. I’d be curious to know how much comments have dropped off since the loss of the Recent Comments widget. If it’s not a lot, I will GLADLY withdraw my objection.
dmsilev
@David Koch:
Well, we’ve already heard from Boehner and Ryan, and their responses basically boil down to “Waaaah! Mean President said mean things! Not bipartisan!”. I’m pretty sure that’s what David Brooks will also be saying, though in his case the tears will be implied instead of explicit.
kay
@David Koch:
John McCain is on a tour right now attacking them daily over Citizens.
He goes personally after Scalia, voice dripping with sarcasm.
He and Feingold attended the hearing.
MobiusKlein
Check out the latest crap from 5’th circuit via the always moderate and calm Kevin Drum: Wingnuts on the bench
ETA. and drum link, since y’all don’t have him on speed dial
http://motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2012/04/fifth-circuit-judges-now-full-wingnut-mode
Ben Franklin
@kay:
A link would be informative.
MikeJ
@kay:
http://www.tucsonweekly.com/TheRange/archives/2012/03/01/mccain-citizens-united-was-the-worst-decision-of-the-united-states-supreme-court
David Koch
@MikeJ: That’s a very good point. McCain has repeatedly ripped the Court for striking down McCain-Feingold. Yet, that’s okay with the Village because he’s not a Democrat.
Raven
@David Koch: They are going nuts because the president is supposed to be above this.
dmsilev
@Raven:
Fixed that for you.
Martin
Just an aside: Sheriff Joe is a fucking lunatic. Just wanted to remind everyone of that.
MikeJ
@Raven: Above it the way, say Reagan was?
(btw, am I the only one with no editing toolbar?)
Raven
I didn’t say that was what I thought.
Frankensteinbeck
@kay:
I would have Citizens United overturned in a second, but it IS living up to all my hopes and dreams as a money-eating vortex of pure incompetence.
Felanius Kootea
@David Koch: Speaking of talking points, here’s Pelosi on what she thinks is the problem with Democrats: “the parable of the blue cup.”
SiubhanDuinne
@arguingwithsignposts:
Funny (no, actually not funny) that the fictional institution of higher learning in Atlas Shrugged (alma mater of John Galt and his buds) was called Patrick Henry University.
Citizen_X
How many divisions do the Villagers have?
slag
@phil: I think you need a time machine.
NR
@chopper:
The difference is that FDR’s initiatives were popular. The ACA isn’t.
quannlace
I caught a few minutes of that, this morning. Fuckin’ hilarious! Man, if Mika sounds like the voice of reason you know Joe’s gone off the rails.
Uh..and exactly what can Obama do to ‘retaliate’ against the SCOTUS? Make another mildly reproving speech? The horrors!!
beltane
@efgoldman: The wingnut judges are going to whittle down the Constitution to nothing more than the phrase “God and Guns Forever!” and maybe something about white people.
dedc79
@arguingwithsignposts: Well, as Patrick Henry once said “Give me liberty, or give me naming rights to a crazy right-wing college”
Raven
@efgoldman: Tell me more.
Ben Franklin
@aimai:
Got you.
toastr
ohh baby jebus is weeping. I’m getting the vapors
by the way, paul ryan and his media enablers can eat a bag of dicks
Tonal Crow
This is kinda OT, but I thought everyone would like to know that Arizona is about to ban Balloon Juice:
(emphasis added).
Get in your licks against Republicans now, because soon it’ll be 6 months and daily body-cavity searches for you!
lamh35
So I finally saw the speech by POTUS today, wow game on.
Thanks to that speech, I find myself in an unwelcome position…I agree with Mark Halperin.
Mark Halperin @Markhalperin
Raven
@efgoldman: My late, great Cocker Spaniel will be pleased!
aimai
Its great politics. The President always has to run against Congress and in this case he can run against Congress and the Courts. You simply can’t underestimate how little American voters know of what is going on–I just was talking to a young, pro-choice, phlebotomist who is going to nursing school. Apparently I was the first to break it to her that Scott Brown and the Republican party want to deny her birth control and stick a vaginal ultrasound wand up her if she needs an abortion. That’s someone working in the health care field, young, female, and totally affected both by the ACA and by the generic Anti woman legislation. And as of yesterday she had heard nothing of what was going on. She’s fired up now.
The more people realize what the ACA offers the more furious they are going to be if it is struck down by the Courts. It would be very bad for us as a people if it is struck down, but it will be very good for Obama and the Dems. In about five seconds the right wing pundits will be gibbering about how Obama made them cut off their noses to spite their faces just the way they did when the Virginia Vaginal Creeper bill blew up in their faces and when Rush Limbaugh made a fool of himself on the air. Both times they started out all triumphal and ended up accusing Obama of having played them.
aimai
burnspbesq
You caused me to click through to Ruth Marcus and Jennifer Rubin.
You, sir, are fucking dead.
LosGatosCA
@Jeff Spender:
Vapid commentary from the media is in part caused by moronic behavior by the 90% of the politicians. Another big part is caused by the stunningly low average IQ of their viewers/readers. Only about a third of the vapidity is caused by their own willful ignorance.
CaliCat
Speaking of Villagers, can we all agree that Howard Fineman should be inducted into their Hall of Fame? His hackiness is reaching new heights of glory all the time.
LosGatosCA
@lamh35:
Mark Halperin just wants to hedge his bets, believe it he’s rooting for Romney all the way. He’s just trying to Lou Holtz the opposition. Lou talks up every opponent like they are the Second Coming before every game.
dmsilev
By the way, now that polls have closed in MD and DC, we can announce that Barack Obama has received enough delegates to be renominated.
Just in case anyone was wondering.
Baud
@dmsilev: Thanks. I was concerned.
lamh35
@LosGatosCA: oh, yeah, I’ve peeped Dick Halperin’s game. He’s such a shill for Romney that I’m always surprised he can talk with his mouth full of …
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@LosGatosCA: I’m sure you’re right, but so is Halperin, in this case. I predict a major blunder by Romney in at least one debate. He has no patience with underlings, and he sees everyone as an underling; he’ll step on his dick by being too contemptuously hostile of Obama, a reporter, or most likely if there’s a town hall debate.
ETA: that is, most likely a civilian, if there’s a town hall debate.
Raven
@aimai: Give em a light and they’ll follow it anywhere. . .
FST
burnspbesq
@Ben Franklin:
Waldron’s an idiot. The genius of the Constitutional scheme of separation of powers is that it provides a counter-majoritarian check on the “animal spirits” of the political branches.
Lithwick is more of an idiot for giving his views any respect,
And you’re even more of an idiot for thinking that anyone would be impressed by your comment. Well done.
Schlemizel
Remember how they wept when the Kenyan Usurper had the temerity to question the wisdom of Citizens United vs. Common Decency? The vinegar and water that fill what Roberts calls his head was whipped into a froth from the violent shaking of his head.
It was so impolite and of course recent history has shown he was wrong & the decision has HELPED make democracy stronger not given big money more control over us peons.
Raven
@Schlemizel: Wasn’t it Alito?
David Koch
@dmsilev: Still not too late to primary Barry at the convention.
Weiner/Olbermann 2012!
Southern Beale
Conservatives will never never never never never EVER like Obama.
Schlemizel
@Raven:
You might be right but one douche is the same as another as far as I can tell
Suffern ACE
@Tonal Crow: Hmmm. I wonder if the point is to make felons of as many under 30s as possible, ensuring the gerontocracy for another 30 years.
Triassic Sands
“The point I was making is that the Supreme Court is the final say on our Constitution and our laws, and all of us have to
respectaccept it…”Fixed.
gocart mozart
Did Obama say something about unelected radical activist judges usurping the will of the American people and imposing their authority by judicial fiat because if so, that would be wrong. Wait. What? That was was EVERY SINGLE CONSERVATIVE JAGGOFF IN THE LAST 25 YEARS! Oh well then, carry on.
Lojasmo
@arguingwithsignposts:
I have no idea what the recent comments widget was. I wish I had ever seen it, as the site is damn near un-navigable.
Raven
@Schlemizel: This Party Just Took a Turn for the Douche!
wrb
@lamh35:
The Real Mitt Romney?
Johannes
@MobiusKlein: I hate to blogwhore, but the brazenly political nature of the Fifth Circuit’s punishment essay has me incandescent. As an appellate lawyer for 20 years, I have never seen anything like it, and, as far as I can tell, it is done solely to inflict political harm on the President to benefit his adversaries. More here.
El Cid
Aare you fucking shitting me? In context, yeah, it was interesting that Obama noted that the Sup Ct can indeed make itself illegitimated politically.
But outside dark nightmare interpretations of what might be in the radical Kenyonesian Muslim President’s mind, no, he didn’t in any way suggest any intimidation or threat.
Unless now suddenly a Democratic President who questions the wisdom of the transubstantiated-into-Gods Supreme Court Just-icers — as opposed to Republican Presidents — is automatically to be chattered about as pretty much gunning them down in a dark alleyway.
Kathleen
@beltane: I expect a redux of the Dred Scott decision.
Yevgraf
I just hope that when the avoidable collapse comes, I can be present to watch a starving 10 year old stab Scalia in the eye with a handle broken off of Ruth Marcus’ shattered Calphalon cookware in order to wrest a dead raw sparrow from his grasp in order to have a meal.
Some Loser
@Ben Franklin:
Are people really trying to debate the legitimacy of Judicial Review? Ignoring the constitutionality of it; removing Judicial Review would severely unbalance the power between the branches. This is high school level stuff here.
I know people are cynical of the whole Justice system here, but please do not allow that cynicism to destroy the Constitution and this country. Maybe we can discuss how to fix the court system without removing its importance!
Groucho48
The Village reaction? Gingrich is one smart puppy. He has audacity, vision, and the smarts to bring his vision to fruition. Yes, he can be provocative, but, we need more of that. What a guy!
SectarianSofa
@Yevgraf:
So say we all.
Omnes Omnibus
@Schlemizel: It was Alito, but I can’t argue your point.
El Cid
@Some Loser: Judicial Review isn’t in the Constitution. Jefferson thought it despotic — how is an unelected body of unquestionable judges determining what may and may not be law “democratic”?