Fwd: Wheels coming off of Barry's wagon....

Date: Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 3:22 PM
Subject: Wheels coming off of Barry's wagon....
To:









More anti Obama words and thoughts
Wheels coming off of Barry's wagon....


Really interesting. If the Supreme Court rules against Obama, his administration is really in trouble and could bring it crashing down.
  Sources say smack down of Obama by Supreme Court may be inevitable.
Conservative Examiner  Anthony G. Martin 




According to sources who watch the inner workings of the federal government, a smack down of Barack Obama by the U.S. Supreme Court may be inevitable.

Ever since Obama assumed the office of President, critics have hammered him on a number of Constitutional issues.  Critics have complained that much if not all of Obama's major initiatives run headlong into Constitutional roadblocks on the power of the federal government.

(AP Photo/Keith Srakocic). Chief Justice John Roberts, U.S. Supreme Court.

Obama certainly did not help himself in the eyes of the Court when he used the venue of the State of the Union address early in the year to publicly flog the Court over its ruling that the First Amendment grants the right to various organizations to run political ads during the time of an election.

The tongue-lashing clearly did not sit well with the Court, as demonstrated by Justice Sam Alito, who publicly shook his head and stated under his breath, 'That's not true,' when Obama told a flat-out lie concerning the Court's ruling.

As it has turned out, this was a watershed moment in the relationship between the executive and the judicial branches of the federal government. Obama publicly declared war on the court, even as he blatantly continued to propose legislation that flies in the face of every known Constitutional principle upon which this nation has stood for over 200 years.

Obama has even identified Chief Justice John Roberts as his number one enemy, that is, apart from Fox News and Rush Limbaugh.  And it is no accident that the one swing-vote on the court, Justice Anthony Kennedy, stated recently that he has no intention of retiring until 'Obama is gone.'

Apparently, the Court has had enough.

The Roberts Court has signaled, in a very subtle manner, of course, that it intends to address the issues about which Obama critics have been screaming to high heaven.  A ruling against Obama on any one of these important issues could potentially cripple the Administration.  Such a thing would be long overdue.

First, there is ObamaCare, which violates the Constitutional principle barring the federal government from forcing citizens to purchase something.  And no, this is not the same thing as states requiring drivers to purchase car insurance, as some of the intellectually-impaired claim.  The Constitution limits FEDERAL government, not state governments, from such things, and further, not everyone has to drive, and thus, a citizen could opt not to purchase car insurance by simply deciding not to drive a vehicle.

In the ObamaCare world, however, no citizen can 'opt out.'
Second,  sources state that the Roberts court has quietly accepted information concerning discrepancies in Obama's history that raise serious questions about his eligibility for the office of President.  The charge goes far beyond the birth certificate issue.  This information involves possible fraudulent use of a Social Security number in Connecticut, while Obama was a high school student inHawai.  And that is only the tip of the iceberg.

Third, several cases involving possible criminal activity, conflicts of interest, and pay-for-play cronyism could potentially land many Administration officials, if not the President himself, in hot water with the Court.  Frankly, in the years this writer has observed politics, nothing comes close to comparing with the rampant corruption of this Administration, not even during the Nixon years.  Nixon and the Watergate conspirators look like choirboys compared to the jokers that populate this Administration.

In addition, the Court will eventually be forced to rule on the dreadful decision of the Obama DOJ to sue the state of Arizona.  That, too, could send the Obama doctrine of open borders to an early grave, given that the Administration refuses to enforce federal law on illegal aliens.

And finally, the biggie that could potentially send the entire house of cards tumbling in a free-fall is the latest revelation concerning the Obama-Holder Department of Justice and its refusal to pursue the New Black Panther Party.
  The group is caught on tape committing felonies by attempting to intimidate Caucasian voters into staying away from the polls

A whistle-blower who resigned from the DOJ is now charging Holder with the deliberate refusal to pursue cases against Blacks, particularly those who are involved in radical hate-groups, such as the New Black Panthers, who have been caught on tape calling for the murder of white people and their babies.

This one is a biggie that could send the entire Administration crumbling
--that is, if the Justices have the guts to draw a line in the sand
at the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.




10 comments:

Anonymous said...

So the justices of the supreme court would let their personal feelings determine their decisions? They would deliberately go outside legal bounds in order to get "revenge" on the President?

Sounds incredibly unprofessional to me, and a violation of their oath of office. Makes them sound like the "activist" judges conservatives are always gnashing their teeth about.

Anonymous said...

Yes, I'm sure the constitutional scholars who wrote the Health Care bill never thought to examine the potential constitutional ramifications. Obama's only a professor of constitutional law. I'm sure it never crossed his mind.

The Constitution limits FEDERAL government, not state governments, from such things, and further, not everyone has to drive, and thus, a citizen could opt not to purchase car insurance by simply deciding not to drive a vehicle.

Well isn't that great? You don't have to drive. We just have massively subsidized a society where driving is necessary for 95% of the population.

Can some conservative please explain to me why the individual mandate is a bad thing? Especially sinces its the only part of the health care package which people seem to object to?

You are going to want health insurance, right? To not be covered is to put you and your families health and fiscal safety at risk, correct? So buying insurance is something that you would want to do anyway, right?

Now the government is going to subsidize your insurance purchase, or make you pay a nominal fee. How is this a bad thing?

Why shouldn't the very small minority of people who don't want to have insruance be required to have purchase it? When they get sick and go to the ER, who pays for it? US! The insurance buying populace! So isn't it a matter of personal responsibility to chip in and pull your own weight? Aren't Republicans constantly bitching about welfare and free loading parasites leeching off "real Americans"? How is this different?

Oh right, the Democrat made it happen. Therefore it must be bad.

ferschitz said...

I'm personally not all that thrilled by the mandate, myself, and I'm a bleeding left liberal. Most progressives wanted nationalized health care, or at the least, a public option. Something must be done with the out of control costs of health care in the USA, and we defintely no longer have "the best health care in the world." Maybe US Oligarchs & politicians do, but the rest of us serfs do not.

So what happened during the HCR negotiations? Rightwingers were astroturfed by billionaire Oligarch Koch brothers & by billioaire media moguls Roger Aisles and Rupert Murdoch to astroturf Ron Paul's Tea-Party movement. Via such intellectual "luminaries" as Rush Limbaugh & Glenn Beck - both also at least multi-millionaires by virtue of their pay from the Kochs & Murdoch - incited rightwingers to behave like idiotic bullying morons... shrieking and shouting at Town Halls so that *serious* debate and discussion simply could NOT happen... going to astroturfed "rallies" funded by the Kochs, widely promoted by Fox, and it's also camera that Fox employees were inciting the crowds at these rallies.

All the while carrying nasty ugly racist signs, including Hitler signs and signs of Dachau. Rightwingers threatened politicians, carried guns, spit on black politicians, and generally behaved like the worst school yard bullies ever.

Any other point of view was shouted down in a nastily abusive fashion.

So we ended up with I consider to be a half-@ssed HCR, but seriously: WHO is to blame for that? Sure, I also think Obama & the Dems should've stood firmer and done what 70% of the population wanted.

But let's face: rightwingers ALLOWED themselves to be played like fiddles by their corporate sponsors and the billionaire Oligarchs, who for reasons that make no sense whatsover, conservatives feel an authoritarian need to worship and venerate.

Wake Up. David Koch merely looks down on all of the T-baggers with smiling contempt at how easy it is to brainwash and manipulate them.

This post is most likely written by someone on David Koch's payroll... so here we go again.

Bebe 99 said...

The mandate for heatlh insurance was originally a Republican idea to combat the fact that people who are uninsured go to emergency rooms and get free care. This is something that NORMAL Republicans of the past WOULD have supported by making it all about the lazy poor getting free medical care at the expense of hard-working-insured Americans. Now this Republican idea is the only constitutional problem with the bill!

Valeyard said...

Roberts, nooooo! Balls and strikes! Just an umpire!

Frankly, in the years this writer has observed politics, nothing comes close to comparing with the rampant corruption of this Administration, not even during the Nixon years.

I wish I too could have fallen through a time warp from ten years ago.

In addition, the Court will eventually be forced to rule on the dreadful decision of the Obama DOJ to sue the state of Arizona. That, too, could send the Obama doctrine of open borders to an early grave

And the court could rule that illegal immigrants get FREE ICE CREAM! But it's more likely to be a clear-cut case of federal authority specifically outlined in the Constitution.

gruaud said...

The only way the "wheels come off" is if the Grouchy Old Party can get majorities in the House and Senate and they can open up fishing expeditions and then impeach on some trumped-up BS charge.

Because they WILL impeach every Democratic president no matter what, because that's how they roll now. Fuck bipartisanship.

Obama's biggest mistake will be seen as thinking he could work with these vicious jackals. Jesus, Barack -- you ignore your base ...(Remember us? The folks who turned out in droves to get you elected? Hello?)...and reached out to these dicks and they all but blow-torched your hand.

CharlieE said...

Wasn't this (or something nearly identical) posted here about a week ago?

Anoner said...

To CharlieE: something nearly identical is posted every week. Most of these nasty lying diatribes say pretty much the same thing.

Shorter Rightwing Forward: the President's a "n" word; hate hate fear fear scary scary...

CharlieE said...

@Anoner:

Well, I meant exactly the same.

This exact article was posted on 10/1/2010. The last paragraph was

"This one is a biggie that could send the entire Administration crumbling
--that is, if the Justices have the guts to draw a line in the sand
at the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. "

katz said...

I love the Black Panthers bit. That's basically where they throw in their cards and say "Yeah, we've got nothing."

 
Creative Commons License
MyRightWingDad.net is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.