P-resident “Obama” (Why the scare quotes? Because there is strong evidence that “Obama” is a former name, assumed for whatever purposes by the adopted son of Indonesian citizen Lolo Soetoro–make of the readily available facts whatever you will) has no shame. In a bratty tantrum against the SCOTUS, The Zero, self-proclaimed constitutional scholar that he is, uttered the following nonsense,
I’m confident that the Supreme Court will not take what would be an unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress. And 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 — that an unelected group of people would somehow overturn a duly constituted and passed law.
“…strong majority”? What fairlyland is The Zero living in? “…unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed… by… Congress”? Unprecedented, Extraordinary? This comment certainly puts the definitive nail in the coffin of The Zero’s constitutional “scholarship” since even casual students are aware of Marbury v. Madison, 1803 and likely aware that the 209 years between now and then are certainly not empty of the SCOTUS voiding laws passed by Congress. Indeed, in one recent eight year period (1994-2002) the SCOTUS struck down 32 federal laws, voiding them wholly or in part. No, only the “constitutional scholar” who goes by the name of Barack Hussein Obama seems to view the SCOTUS striking down a law passed by Congress as “unprecedented” and “extraordinary”.
Dumbass.
Hamilton explained the thinking of the Founders on the matter in Federalist 78:
The complete independence of the courts of justice is peculiarly essential in a limited Constitution. By a limited Constitution, I understand one which contains certain specified exceptions to the legislative authority; such, for instance, as that it shall pass no bills of attainder, no ex-post-facto laws, and the like. Limitations of this kind can be preserved in practice no other way than through the medium of courts of justice, whose duty it must be to declare all acts contrary to the manifest tenor of the Constitution void. Without this, all the reservations of particular rights or privileges would amount to nothing. [emphasis added]
The Zero is a sham and a shame, and anyone thinking he has anything useful or helpful to say about anything has fewer working brain cells than a 10-year-old cracked crock of spoiled kimche.
Sidebar: I truly love it that my spell checker flags “Obama” every time I type it.
BTW, no, I did not link to Federalist 78. You should have your own copy in hardcopy and be able to get to it with no problem via any of the links on the first page of a search for “Federalist Papers,” so why link? My hardcopy is an arm’s length away from me as I type this, along with copies of the other American State Papers, and, IMO, if you are a citizen of the US, so ought yours to be. Just sayin’