Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (480538)	4/4/2012 12:37:30 AM
From: carranza2	3 Recommendations Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 793608

Even visiting the court was brazen. But don't worry, the court is immune to politics. The Founders gave the Justices lifetime appointments for very good reasons. It is an affront to the law. Every reasonably intelligent lawyer should be appalled. It was a serious but not effective breach of protocol....you don't lobby the Supremes for vote unless you are arguing formally. I suspect the justices were amused......thinking all the while of their lifetime salaries, which constitutionally cannot be reduced, and their lifetime appointments.

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (480538)	4/4/2012 1:37:39 AM
From: goldworldnet	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793608

In addition to striking down the mandate, hopefully the court will put more limitations on the commerce clause. To paraphrase Biden, that would be a big deal. :) * * *

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (480538)	4/4/2012 2:07:59 AM
From: KLP	6 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793608

Krauthammer made note of Obama's foot in mouth as well.... Krauthammer: Obama Trying To Bully The Supreme Court While Liberals Are In Shock On Real Clear Politics: March 3, 2012 Playing "Here's the president talking about respect for the law and implying there's partisanship if the law is overturned. We all were witnesses to the oral hearings in which Obama's case for the constitutionality of the law was utterly demolished to the point where one liberal observer called it a 'train wreck,'" Charles Krauthammer said on FOX News' "Special Report" this evening. "It's perfectly natural for a majority of the Court to side with the side that actually won the argument intellectually. That's not partisanship, that's logic. What is partisanship is when the four liberal justices are in such lockstep with the administration that they end up supporting the case that's been utterly destroyed in an open argument and be humiliated," Krauthammer said on the panel. "Second, the president talks about the deal as unprecedented. What' he talking about? Since 1803, our system has been one in which the Supreme Court in the end, judges, whether the law is constitutional or not. And in this case, he talked about the law passing by majority. He had a strong majority, with 75 Democrats outnumbering Republicans in the House. Obamacare passed by seven votes. It was a very narrow majority. It wasn't a broad of a majority that he implied," he added. "On every count he doesn't have an argument. This is liberals in shock over watching their side being demolished in oral argument and trying to bully the Supreme Court into ending up on their side in a case which they clearly lost intellectually and logically," Krauthammer concluded.