Reader Poll
Was Obama's criticism of the
Supreme Court at the SOTU justified?
Supreme Court at the SOTU justified?
COMMENTS
This is a purely unscientific poll designed strictly for fun and to
allow our readers to sound off on current news and political events.
allow our readers to sound off on current news and political events.
Is ANYTHING B.O. does justified?
----
HE IS THE LEAST PRESIDENTIAL PERSON IN OUR HISTORY.HE IS, AND ALWAYS WILL BE A CHICAGO THUG.
CANNOT WAIT FOR HIM TO EITHER BE IMPEACHED AS AN IMPOSTER, OR GET AN ATTACK OF GOUT, WHICH
WOULD KEEP HIM IN AGONY FOR THE REST OF HIS TERM.
----
Hell no! He deliberately distorted the ruling the Court made for his own political agenda. Even some in the liberal press (!) have said
Obama's interpretation of the Court's ruling was wrong. So much for our Executive in Chief who supposely is a Constitutional lawyer.
This guy is quite the snake-oil salesman!
----
I disagree with Obama's opinion. What he calls "special interests" could be Goldman Sachs, could be ACORN, could be the NRA. Why
should Dan Rather be the only one allowed to sneak something in at the last minute? (fake National Guard papers) Why should I lose
one First Amendment right (freedom of speech) by exercising another one (freedom of assembly)?
Separate from this though is the sheer rudeness of having them as guests and then holding them up to public ridicule. If he wanted to
criticize them he should not have invited them. I bet he gets off on being able to criticize the Justices like that but it was crass and
classless.
----
Obama: the ONE.
That seems to be as far as he can count. Thus he can't enumerate the THREE branches of government. That would constitute (pardon
the pun) an inconvenient truth.
So, butt out, Mr President.
Gershon, from Champaign, Illinois,
where every state penitentiary has bi-partisan Gubernatorial suites!
----
Of course it was. They made a lousy,unfair decision. Shouldn't that be a president's right?
----
HE IS THE LEAST PRESIDENTIAL PERSON IN OUR HISTORY.HE IS, AND ALWAYS WILL BE A CHICAGO THUG.
CANNOT WAIT FOR HIM TO EITHER BE IMPEACHED AS AN IMPOSTER, OR GET AN ATTACK OF GOUT, WHICH
WOULD KEEP HIM IN AGONY FOR THE REST OF HIS TERM.
----
Hell no! He deliberately distorted the ruling the Court made for his own political agenda. Even some in the liberal press (!) have said
Obama's interpretation of the Court's ruling was wrong. So much for our Executive in Chief who supposely is a Constitutional lawyer.
This guy is quite the snake-oil salesman!
----
I disagree with Obama's opinion. What he calls "special interests" could be Goldman Sachs, could be ACORN, could be the NRA. Why
should Dan Rather be the only one allowed to sneak something in at the last minute? (fake National Guard papers) Why should I lose
one First Amendment right (freedom of speech) by exercising another one (freedom of assembly)?
Separate from this though is the sheer rudeness of having them as guests and then holding them up to public ridicule. If he wanted to
criticize them he should not have invited them. I bet he gets off on being able to criticize the Justices like that but it was crass and
classless.
----
Obama: the ONE.
That seems to be as far as he can count. Thus he can't enumerate the THREE branches of government. That would constitute (pardon
the pun) an inconvenient truth.
So, butt out, Mr President.
Gershon, from Champaign, Illinois,
where every state penitentiary has bi-partisan Gubernatorial suites!
----
Of course it was. They made a lousy,unfair decision. Shouldn't that be a president's right?