Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
You don't see the difference? Why am I not surprised.
Of course I see the difference.
The quote I posted is from a conservative.
The quote you people are bitching about is not.
Listen up fuck wit you have not contributed to the thread. your only venue of attack is grammar and spelling. Fuck it this is nothing but a fucking discussion board. We aren't in school I haven't been since 1982. So if all you can be is a grammar Nazi move your mother fucking silly bitch ass on.
This idiot is clearly here to deflect and derail...
I challanged him through other means.
Let it drop.
That shit pisses me off no one is perfect and it detracts from the topic. You got pass by bullshit like that to get back to the topic of discussion. There's a lot of wasted post it's uncalled for.
Obama warns justices against 'activism' on health law
President Obama said today he is confident the Supreme Court will uphold his health care law -- and basically warned the justices against striking down the law by practicing what he called "judicial activism."
"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," Obama said during a joint news conference with the leaders of Canada and Mexico.
Obama defined activism by saying "an unelected group of people would somehow overturn a duly constituted passed law -- well, here's a good example. And I'm pretty confident that this -- this court will recognize that and not take that step."
Obama taking his politics to the SCOTUS?
The case is over...they voted...they know the outcome...Is Obama trying to influence thier decision?
Video in the story...
Listen up fuck wit you have not contributed to the thread. your only venue of attack is grammar and spelling. Fuck it this is nothing but a fucking discussion board. We aren't in school I haven't been since 1982. So if all you can be is a grammar Nazi move your mother fucking silly bitch ass on. Do we have an understanding?About what?
Clearly this T person is a functional illiterate, and you're not looking too good yourself.
Are you retaining water?
You seem tense.
Listen up fuck wit you have not contributed to the thread. your only venue of attack is grammar and spelling. Fuck it this is nothing but a fucking discussion board. We aren't in school I haven't been since 1982. So if all you can be is a grammar Nazi move your mother fucking silly bitch ass on. Do we have an understanding?
Are you retaining water?
You seem tense.
Were you dropped on your head at birth?
We are not talking about Reagan or George Bush.... we are talking about a president, Barak Hussein Obama, who is threatening the Supreme Court and trying to render them powerless.
This is unprecedented in American history.
Bull... Shit...
Obama is criticizing the court, and making suggestions that sound almost exactly like those of Reagan and Bush.
What "threat" has been issued exactly in this instance?
Has Obama stated he will attempt to prosecute members of the court?
Has he threatened to dissolve the court?
What sort of "retribution" do you believe is implied here?
The answer is obviously "none", which would mean there is no "threat" involved. In order for a "threat" to exist there must be some sort of implied punishment. Since there is not, there is no "threat".
Listen up fuck wit you have not contributed to the thread. your only venue of attack is grammar and spelling. Fuck it this is nothing but a fucking discussion board. We aren't in school I haven't been since 1982. So if all you can be is a grammar Nazi move your mother fucking silly bitch ass on. Do we have an understanding?About what?
Clearly this T person is a functional illiterate, and you're not looking too good yourself.
Are you retaining water?
You seem tense.
Wow, thanks for that.
Now tell me how Reagan's quote, which referred to Roe v Wade, was a Supreme Court decision, and was a clearly matter of constitutional rights; and George Bush's comment, which referred to judgement on the constitutionality of the proposed Protection of Marriage Act; do not fall into the same category.
We are not talking about Reagan or George Bush.... we are talking about a president, Barak Hussein Obama, who is threatening the Supreme Court and trying to render them powerless.
This is unprecedented in American history.
You may not WANT to talk about Reagan or Bush's statements regarding "Judicial Activism" because it total undermines your argument...
But we ARE going to talk about Reagan and Bush's statements regarding "Judicial Activism" because it total undermines your argument!
Like it or not!
We are not talking about Reagan or George Bush.... we are talking about a president, Barak Hussein Obama, who is threatening the Supreme Court and trying to render them powerless.
This is unprecedented in American history.
Bull... Shit...
Obama is criticizing the court, and making suggestions that sound almost exactly like those of Reagan and Bush.
What "threat" has been issued exactly in this instance?
Has Obama stated he will attempt to prosecute members of the court?
Has he threatened to dissolve the court?
What sort of "retribution" do you believe is implied here?
The answer is obviously "none", which would mean there is no "threat" involved. In order for a "threat" to exist there must be some sort of implied punishment. Since there is not, there is no "threat".
I know this is a complete waste of time, but I am going to do it anyway, because that is what I do.
Reagan and Bush were complaining about SCOTUS doing things that were normally beyond what they do. An example of this is the argument that the Justices decided questions that were not actually before them when they struck down Citizen's United. Neither of them ever criticized a decision before it was made, mostly because only idiots criticize things that haven't happened.
Obama is claiming that SCOTUS striking down a law is unprecedented, even though he actually praised them for striking down a law in 2008. That is either stupid, or flat out political posturing for his base. Considering that the idiots like you are all happy about it, I vote for the latter.
The Constitution does not give the Supreme Court the power to declare acts of Congress, nor State laws, nor acts of the president unconstitutional. The Supreme Court took that power upon themselves in a famous, perhaps the most famous, case, Marbury v. Madison. In that case the Court just assumed that power and that power is now accepted, some even believing it to be in the Constitution. It was perhaps the first and biggest form of judicial activism.
About what?
Clearly this T person is a functional illiterate, and you're not looking too good yourself.
Thread not about me...But I will make a request to the MODS for YOU and I to have it out whereever YOU choose...
Game?
Parcheesi
You know when you put words in all caps like that, I almost wet myself in fear.
Really.
Do you drink daily?
We're stuck on stupid? And you chumps are all for the myopic swine who got us in this mess- and for keeping the stupidest and most ridiculously overpriced health care system in the WORLD!! Pub dupes! LOL
And as those numbers make the 40+ Million uninsured more true every day Immigration isn't enforced?We're stuck on stupid? And you chumps are all for the myopic swine who got us in this mess- and for keeping the stupidest and most ridiculously overpriced health care system in the WORLD!! Pub dupes! LOL
Who's efforts keep it so expensive? The more you do, the more you deny what you are doing Dip Shit. How about you start with the Failure of the Immigration Policy that floods our streets with the unemployed and uninsured, more everyday?
Note he's been silent in campaign stops until after it was in front of the court?
NOTE the silence of the media in his open threats to the court?
