tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1522121129844880066.post2064750860030559069..comments2023-10-24T11:23:31.580-04:00Comments on Le·gal In·sur·rec·tion: The Nuts Attack On RobertsWilliam A. Jacobsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16433685588536441422noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1522121129844880066.post-27153781619157687182010-03-12T16:42:36.927-05:002010-03-12T16:42:36.927-05:00Greenwald was right. Pres. Obama could have them ...Greenwald was right. Pres. Obama could have them arrested, but all he is doing is stating what the Constitution requires and allows him do...stating what is wrong with the SOFU and offering remedies. <br /><br />Just so you say it, Alinsky, etc... does not mean it is real or factual or anybody cares. Let's see, Pres. Obama does not like white people, yet he hires them, his mother is white....he hates America, yet having been born in Pakistan, Kenya, or whatever, he stays in a country he hates. This is beyond sillyBUCKJOHNSONhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09804319139831985173noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1522121129844880066.post-74203736362609350142010-03-11T07:24:17.935-05:002010-03-11T07:24:17.935-05:00The actions of the President and the Democrats was...The actions of the President and the Democrats was inappropriate and smacked of political demagogurey. I think those like Schumer forgot that this is the United States not Venezuela or the nation that they wanted Honduras to become. Thankfully our founders understood the political bullying and harrassment that can take place and created an indpendent judiaciary.Thankfully this is why after being voted into office SCOTUS is not dependent on their positions to the Congress. How smart were the founding fathers that they knew that inadequate men and women need to bully to get their way instaed of using logic and intelligence. But then if they had a lgoical and intelligent argument they wouldn't need to bully. KudosJustice Roberts.<br /><br />http://libertysspirit.blogspot.comAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1522121129844880066.post-46263039120995808592010-03-11T04:41:15.578-05:002010-03-11T04:41:15.578-05:00Over the past few weeks I have been doing some res...Over the past few weeks I have been doing some research about the "fool on the hill". I am at odds with some of what I have been reading, thinking that it is over the top, and so far not really verifiable. However, some things do stick....<br /><br />1. According to what I have learned, there is no doubt that the "fool" (because he lacks wisdom and do check out what it says in the Psalms) has been groomed to take on the position of POTUS. Doors were opened in very mysterious ways... but there is a common thread in the names mentioned. Tony Rezko is definitely a clue regarding how the campaign was financed. <br /><br />2. In keeping with the Citizens United case, one very real issue is how "the fool" managed to raise more than $800million as a campaign war chest through the use of the 507s. It is through them that money from Middle Eastern countries was laundered. He received millions of dollars in donations via the 507s and those donors are not transparent. They are also illegal. <br /><br />3. The White House would like us to believe that the Citizen's United decision is going to open the floodgates of funding from corporations etc., and they went as far as claiming that it would open the way for foreign corporations to take out campaign advertisements. This is not true... and anyone who has bothered to read what Kennedy wrote can see that this is not the case. S144(e) [I think I have the right section number] was not struck down. The only section struck down was s144(b) and the reason was due to the First Amendment. It is because of a mandate - there was a financial sanction involved - that the Supreme Court chose to strike down this clause. Corporations are staffed by citizens. They have as much right to put forward their views as the media corporations. If they are under attack by the White House, then they should have the right to pay for advertisements to set forth their views. <br /><br />The Citizens United case that is the reason for all of this nonsense (or is it just an excuse by the WH to discredit certain people on the Supreme Court aided by their minions such as Greenwald) does not fundamentally change much. The people behind Citizens United approached the FEC to get permission to show a documentary on Hillary on cable television but it would be viewed inside the 60 days from a primary election. It is because there was a small amount of funding from a corporation that the FEC was approached and said No. If Citizens United had gone against the FEC then they would have faced fines. Hence they took the issue to court, and in the end, the justices in the Supreme Court determined that McCain-Feingold acted against free speech and what was of concern was the mandate, the penalty. <br /><br />Something else that I did learn is that there are now people coming forward with claims such as: University of Chicago were told to hire "the fool" and he was hired as an "adjunct lecturer". He was never a professor, and it seems doubtful that he ever taught Constitutional Law. I will be glad when someone comes forward who was in his class and tells the world exactly what he was teaching - like "how to get around the Constitution". <br /><br />What is important about what I have learned is that there is no doubt about his Marxist roots, and that he was fed Marxism from the moment he was born. His mother and grandparents were Marxist. His alleged father was not exactly on the scent. Those Marxist connections include Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dorhn, and his other connections include Louis Farrakahn - the Nation of Islam. <br /><br />I do think that this attack on the Supreme Court by the White House is totally unacceptable. <br /><br />It will be interesting when the cases start coming in if the Abominable Care is passed, since it is clearly unconstitutional, and it should be overturned. In fact everything being done by the Congress at present is unconstitutional.Maggiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00532250145038548627noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1522121129844880066.post-75456469536324957932010-03-11T04:18:13.145-05:002010-03-11T04:18:13.145-05:00@Dave B: that has to be the best comment here !!!...@Dave B: that has to be the best comment here !!!Maggiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00532250145038548627noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1522121129844880066.post-27533418939206461252010-03-11T01:49:02.163-05:002010-03-11T01:49:02.163-05:00I think what Greenwald needs is to compare Justice...I think what Greenwald needs is to compare Justice Alito with someone like... me. I would never have mouthed the words "not true". I would have stood up, turned around, raised my robe and mooned the lying bastard.Dave Bhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08468715877874458173noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1522121129844880066.post-53496497625476266672010-03-11T01:36:15.578-05:002010-03-11T01:36:15.578-05:00What pasadenaphil said better than I ever could mu...What pasadenaphil said better than I ever could muster.... <br /><br />Greenwald evidently has no sense of decorum and of the traditions of past SOTU addresses before this Chicago mobster turned the affair into a political pep rally. Obama is lacking any sense of appropriate approaches and may be one of those mavericks who believes that he can stay in his "terrible twos" for the rest of his life. Tantrum speechmaking and taunting a group which has to maintain its traditional judicial temperament all while a pack of barking rabid congresscritters surround the nine justices howling froth-mouthed to the moon.<br /><br />What made the playground ruckus worse was that the sophomoric POTUS distorted and was factually erroneous to the point that a true scholar like Alito mouthed an objection. How Greenwald can call out Alito for silently and with dignity objecting to silly misrepresentations by a second-rate, soon to be one-term president only demonstrates his own estrangement from America's true political culture, one of civility in public events like the SOTU.<br /><br />Methinks political thugs and guttersnipes on the left like Greenwald will have a very short shelf-life in the marketplace of ideas, for the sake of maintaining decorum befitting the traditions of our country's governance. Greenwald's own pathological projections of his Marxist mindset onto men of great accomplishment and success stem from his own difficulties with personal demons rather than any behavior of gentlemen like Roberts and Alito.dave in bocahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10164227301361227792noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1522121129844880066.post-25565238420059498042010-03-10T21:54:02.317-05:002010-03-10T21:54:02.317-05:00That SOTU scene reminds me of Saddam Hussein's...That SOTU scene reminds me of Saddam Hussein's hanging. The taunting, beating and cheering by those Iraqi executioners during the execution was barbaric and demonstrated why Iraq was far from ready to be considered a civilized society. Civilized societies follow the law and procedures that allow civilized societies to execute its worst criminals as an unfortunate but sacred ritual. Executions are harsh punishments but they do not legitimize boorish and barbaric behavior. The difference is what allows us to hold on to our legitimacy as a civilized society.<br /><br />What Obama, Schumer and the entire gang of thugs did during that SOTU scene was to trash the very protocols and traditions that make us civilized just like those barbaric executioners. With a government run by such yahoos and thugs, how long will it be before we can no longer legitimately claim to be a civilized society? <br /><br />Good manners may not guarantee the survival of a civilized society but they are necessary in periods such as we are now in when traditions force us to behave as if we are civilized long enough to rediscover the reasons why we do. <br /><br />Having tossed aside good manners as well as traditional protocol, these louts have revealed themselves to be not unsophisticated rubes but outright barbarian thugs. This was "Lord of the Flies" behavior.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1522121129844880066.post-22892910976335955212010-03-10T21:49:04.971-05:002010-03-10T21:49:04.971-05:00This is the same Greenwald who declared that Sam A...This is the same Greenwald who declared that Sam Alito had "flamboyantly insinuat[ed] himself into a pure political event, in a highly politicized manner" merely by mouthing "not right" at the SOTU.Conrad Bibbyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05422935506611755825noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1522121129844880066.post-85452127577373104592010-03-10T21:40:40.042-05:002010-03-10T21:40:40.042-05:00I don't think Roberts was taking an ideologica...I don't think Roberts was taking an ideological view, but a defensive view of the court as an equal branch (a check) as the executive and legislative, yet not being allowed to publicly display in kind that equality in this setting.<br /><br />He was not just defending Alito, but every member of his court.<br /><br />Obama's public screw ups are stretching the Democrat's imagination in defending his faux pas. I've been listening to Hannity and his democratic strategist claiming Obama is constitutional expert of some kind. <br /><br />Obama is not only a bore, he is becoming a rude, inconsiderate one.Ralphhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06320105485736052679noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1522121129844880066.post-74936947681345379972010-03-10T20:01:23.930-05:002010-03-10T20:01:23.930-05:00This attack has Alinsky Rule 13 all over it: Pick ...This attack has Alinsky Rule 13 all over it: Pick the target. Freeze it. Personalize it. Polarize it.<br /><br />The leftists are so predictable. It reminds me of Janeane Garofalo with her pseudo-psychobabble about Conservatives and mental illness. Same old, same old. And that they attack such a brilliant, respectable Chief Justice - beyond the pale! <br /><br />If it wasn't so offensive, it would be laughable - it is that ridiculous! But I think you put it best: "... vomitous."DINORightMariehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01067345219054999889noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1522121129844880066.post-31479297481203582842010-03-10T19:30:56.779-05:002010-03-10T19:30:56.779-05:00Crazy times we live in Professor.Crazy times we live in Professor.blindgoosehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01415149373104075973noreply@blogger.com