Obama Continues To Demonize: This Time The U.S. Supreme Court

Since I wrote this (but before I posted it) we have a Supreme Court Justice responding to Obama’s continued demagoguery of SCOTUS.

Obama was saying:

With all due deference to separation of powers, last week, the Supreme Court reversed a century of law that I believe will open the floodgates for special interests, including foreign corporations, to spend without limit in our elections.

(APPLAUSE)

I don’t think American elections should be bankrolled by America’s most powerful interests or, worse, by foreign entities. They should be decided by the American people. And I urge Democrats and Republicans to pass a bill that helps correct some of these problems.

And Samuel Alito shook his head and mouthed, “That’s not true.”  In deference to the separation of powers, and all that:

Our Demagogue-in-Chief has now turned his demonizing away from George Bush (for just a brief moment, mind you) and toward the Supreme Court:

WASHINGTON — President Obama took aim at the Supreme Court on Saturday, saying the justices had “handed a huge victory to the special interests and their lobbyists” with last week’s 5-to-4 decision to lift restrictions on campaign spending by corporations and unions.

The decision will have major political implications for this year’s midterm elections. After it was announced, Mr. Obama immediately instructed his advisers to work with Congress on legislation that would restore some of the limits the court lifted. But in his weekly address on Saturday, he sharply stepped up his criticism of the high court.

“This ruling strikes at our democracy itself,” Mr. Obama said, adding: “I can’t think of anything more devastating to the public interest. The last thing we need to do is hand more influence to the lobbyists in Washington, or more power to the special interests to tip the outcome of elections.”

Barack Obama is a demagouge, and nothing but a demagogue.  You are either with him, or he is bitterly against you.  He has been a fearmongerer and a demagogue from the beginning:

ABC’s Jake Tapper notes the “Helter-Skelter cultish qualities” of “Obama worshipers,” what Joel Stein of the Los Angeles Times calls “the Cult of Obama.” Obama’s Super Tuesday victory speech was a classic of the genre. Its effect was electric, eliciting a rhythmic fervor in the audience — to such rhetorical nonsense as “We are the ones we’ve been waiting for. (Cheers, applause.) We are the change that we seek.”

That was too much for Time’s Joe Klein. “There was something just a wee bit creepy about the mass messianism … ,” he wrote. “The message is becoming dangerously self-referential. The Obama campaign all too often is about how wonderful the Obama campaign is.”You might dismiss the New York Times’ Paul Krugman’s complaint that “the Obama campaign seems dangerously close to becoming a cult of personality” as hyperbole.

And what happens if you contradict such a “cult of personality”?  You become the enemy of the religion.  And you must be attacked with the zeal of the fanatic.

Did the five justices of the U.S. Supreme Court want to “strike at our democracy itself”?  Hardly:

The five justices who sided with the majority characterized it as a victory for the First Amendment and freedom of speech.

Boy, is THAT ever striking against democracy.  Damn free speech!  Damn First Amendment!  Let’s get rid of them both and have Obama instead!

Let’s agree with Barry Hussein’s chief of staff Rahm Emanuel’s take on it instead (see the embedded video):

“When you think about the First Amendment…you think it’s highly overrated.”

That joke dismissing the First Amendment was about as funny as Josef Stalin’s kneeslapper:

“The death of one man is a tragedy. The death of millions is a statistic.”

Here’s an important question: Just why is our demagogic president and his lackeys so unhinged over this decision?

It comes back to the idea of his racist, Marxist, anti-American reverend’s words about “chickens coming home to roost“:

From the previously cited New York Times article:

But the decision could also have a significant effect on Mr. Obama’s expansive domestic agenda. The president has angered many of the big-money industries — like banks and insurers — that would be inclined to dig deep into their pockets to influence the outcome of the president’s legislative proposals.

I’m reminded of the sci-fi movies that feature an evil scientist finally having his own monsters turn on him while he screams.

It’s poetic justice that the industries and businesses that Obama demonized should finally get a chance to have their crack at him.

And only a profoundly anti-American ideologue would say that people shouldn’t have a right to publicly confront their accuser.  When Obama attacks them in public, they should have a right to speak out themselves in public.

An excellent summary of the grounds for the Supreme Court’s decision can be found here.  Basically, the Court recognized that there are two types of corporations: media corporations and non-media corporations.  One had the full rights of free speech, and the other had its free speech rights attacked.  Why should General Electric-owned NBC have complete access to free speech, while other corporations are banned from free speech?

As Justice Kennedy (who is hardly “right wing”) pointed out in his decision:

Media corporations are now exempt from §441b’s ban on corporate expenditures. Yet media corporations accumulate wealth with the help of the corporate form, the largest media corporations have “immense aggregations of wealth,” and the views expressed by media corporations often “have little or no correlation to the public’s support” for those views.

Why is it “striking at our democracy itself” to finally allow corporations to have a voice against a president who has given one sweetheart deal after another to labor unions, while working toward giving labor unions the right to force unions on businesses without a legitimate private vote via card check?

Here’s another example: one of the top bankruptcy attorneys in the country has stated that the Obama White House threatened to destroy his firm using the mainstream media if it continued to oppose Obama’s “Take my offer or else” offer for Chrysler investors.

Here’s another one: Humana was attacked, demonized, and handed an illegal gag order for trying to correct the record as the White House levied lies against it.

You can frankly understand why Obama and the far left want to have the ability to keep attacking businesses and people who depend upon businesses for their livelihood without their opponents being able to respond.  They want to be able to impose their agenda and crush any and all opposition.  By any means necessary.

Fortunately the Supreme Court has allowed corporations to answer back to this demagoguery.

This is an important fact:

Our United States Supreme Court has defined a corporation in the following language: “An association of individuals, acting as a single person …. united for some common purpose …. and permitted by the law to use a common name and to change its members without a dissolution of the Association.”

But liberals don’t like these “people.”  They don’t like businesses.  And they believe they should have the right to attack the people they don’t like, and that the people they attack should have no right to defend themselves.

Corporations are legally recognized to act as a “person.”  Obama has attacked such “persons” too many times to count.  And now that “person” finally is getting the right to respond.

Advertisements

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

4 Responses to “Obama Continues To Demonize: This Time The U.S. Supreme Court”

  1. Robert Feeley Says:

    Obama Fires V.P. Biden, Names iPad as Replacement:

    http://stupidassnews.wordpress.com/2010/01/28/obama-fires-biden-names-apple-ipad-as-replacement/

  2. Michael Eden Says:

    I mean this as no disrespect to mentally challenged people: I would rather see a group of retarded people running this country than Obama and his Cabinet. They would have more common sense, and more understanding of the world as it is, than any of the incompetent clowns that are there now.

    Obama and his ilk have a perverted worldview that literally makes them will themselves to be stupid. They cannot understand the world as it truly is.

  3. Mark Says:

    Michael

    Obama criticized the ruling–he did not demonize the Court or anyone. Look in the mirror, bud. You’re the one using the over the top rhetoric.

    And on the merits, corporations shouldn’t have free speech rights because they can’t speak or hold opinions. The individuals behind them do–officers, directors, shareholders. It’s idiotic to think a corporation can speak. Just because a corporation is a legal “person.” Next the Roberts court will be saying a corporation has the right to bear arms or the right to privacy. Come on!

    The

  4. Michael Eden Says:

    I’ve learned how to use “over-the top rhetoric” from liberals like you. Eight years of Bush derangement syndrome taught me plenty.

    Obama directly attacked the Supreme Court in a way that has not been done. Period. A Presidential historian who researched this reported that there had only been a dozen references to the SCOTUS during state of the unions in the nation’s entire ehistory – with most merely saying neutral things like “The Court’s docket is too full.” Obama’s denunciation of the SCOTUS during the state of the union ruling marked a dramatic escalation of the politicization of the Court and should not have been done. Period.

    Furthermore, corporations are recognized by the law to have rights and responsibilities like actual people because they are formed by people. A corporation is not a “thing”; it is a group of people who pool resources form a business. Why shouldn’t a group of people be treated as people? If you join an organization, do you forfeit your status as a person? On what basis?

    Why shouldn’t these people –

    A corporation is an institution that is granted a charter recognizing it as a separate legal entity having its own rights, privileges, and liabilities distinct from those of its members.[1] There are many different forms of corporations, most of which are used to conduct business.

    Corporations exist as a product of corporate law, and their rules balance the interests of its stakeholders: the management who operate the corporation; creditors who loan it goods, services or money; shareholders who invest their capital; the employees who contribute their labor; and the clients they serve. People work together in corporations to produce value and generate income.

    have rights?

    The SCOTUS decision recognized the obvious: you cannot disseminate political speech without money, and ergo to restrict money is to restrict the dissemination of speech. And just as people have basic rights even when they engage in a collective activity, they have the right of free speech.

    Your assertion that Chief Justice Roberts was the first justice to ever recognize that corporations are treated by the law as persons is utterly ridiculous. You seriously need to learn a few things.

    In the United States, corporations were recognized as having rights to contract, and to have those contracts honored the same as contracts entered into by natural persons, in Dartmouth College v. Woodward. Corporations were recognized as persons for purposes of the 14th Amendment in an 1886 Supreme Court Case, Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad, 118 U.S. 394.

    Furthermore, the SCOTUS ruling resulted from the recognition that some corporations had full free speech rights, and others had serious restrictions. NBC and ABC are great examples: are not only corporations, but they are owned by other larger corporations. Why should they have access to absolute free speech rights, but Boeing can’t have the same rights?

    Learn something about the issues before you come back.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: