THE SUPREME COURT GETS IT WRONG TWO ELECTIONS IN A ROW

I voted for Gore in 2000 and watched with disbelief when the Supreme Court decided to take on Bush v Gore . . . disbelief because the method Florida decided to use to count the 2000 election votes should have remained with Florida. Federal intervention was not necessary, period.

It was an unprincipled decision that the Supremes in their “infinite wisdom” decided should apply solely to this case … that it could not be used as precedent for future cases. Cute, right? The majority of the court acted improperly (States rights, anyone?) and politically (5 Republican Justices) and some would say corruptly.

I still remember the number of people who questioned whether Scalia’s vote was because he wanted to position himself to be the next choice as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.

What was shattered, along with the Constitution, was our belief in the incorruptibility of the Supreme Court justices. We witnessed, first hand, that the Supremes are as political as the rest of the hacks in this country that pretend to be fair and impartial and whose actions show the opposite reality. Legions of Americans have hoped that the Supremes would, once again behave with honor and dignity . . . alas as Donofrio,Berg, etal have witnessed, that will not take place.

The following is from an excellent article in Salon (written in 2000) . . . back when Salon was a source one could trust. It is a superior article that reviews several books written by legal authorities, including Alan Dershowitz, Vincent Bugliosi, Richard H. Pildes, and Cass R. Sunstein and Richard A. Epstein.

I urge anyone that has been fighting the good fight, trying to get our legislators, elected officials, and the courts to take an intellectually honest look at Obama and the Constitutional crisis brought on because Obama will not (cannot) present any documentation (exception the forged COLB on the Internet) proving he meets the eligibility requirements for POTUS as a natural born citizen to read the article. It may give you additional insight as to how to proceed. The article begins:

Supreme Court to democracy: Drop dead

With a single rash, partisan act, the high court has tainted the Bush presidency, besmirched its own reputation and soiled our nation’s proudest legacy.

By Gary Kamiya

Dec. 14, 2001 | Tuesday, Dec. 12, is a day that will live in American infamy long after the tainted election of George W. Bush has faded from memory. With their rash, divisive decision to dispense with the risky and inconvenient workings of democracy and simply award the presidency to their fellow Republican, five right-wing justices dragged the Supreme Court down to perhaps its most ignominious point since the Dred Scott decision.

supreme-idiots1

With this as a back drop, should anyone really be surprised that the Supremes are, again, turning backs on the Constitution? Are we really so surprised that there isn’t a single backbone among them? Is it really so surprising ?

Why, when we have legitimate Constitutional questions will the Supremes not act? Self interest, perhaps? Lack of integrity, courage, intellectual honesty, impartiality? Some of these . . . all of these?

The far reaching impact of the Supreme Court’s decision to dismiss the cases brought thus far on technical issues (standing, wrong format, didn’t cross a “t” or an “i” was missing) is monumental. We have witnessed numerous people run for the office of POTUS we know are ineligible because they are not “natural born citizens” Obama (until he proves he is), Bill Richardson, Roger Calero and still the Supremes remain silent on an issue that effects every citizen of this country!

obamacolblockkey2

There is an element of power and, perhaps inevitably, self-interest in all judicial decisions. As Sunstein remarked, “We’ve tended to have too idealized a view of the court.” But the idea that justice must be blind, that the most powerful court in the world — and arguably the most powerful institution in the country — must not sink into brazen partisanship, is a bedrock principle . . . ( change & emphasis mine )that they have failed to live up to!

We must stand by it, and those justices who violate it must be held accountable. By failing to live up to their judicial oath, by allowing political motivations to sway them, by besmirching democracy itself, the five members of the (change and emphasis mine) 2009 Supreme Court majority will have disgraced themselves forever.

From history’s judgment, there will be no appeal.



Advertisements

5 Comments

Filed under 2008 Election, Barack Obama, Congress, Culture, Democratic National Committee, Democrats, LEGAL ISSUES, LIFE, political party, politics, RANDOM, Uncategorized

5 responses to “THE SUPREME COURT GETS IT WRONG TWO ELECTIONS IN A ROW

  1. Scy

    SCOTUS never takes cases that have absolutely no merit like these. Every single Court knows they have no merit. SCOTUS and the other courts are not in the business of wasting time on bad conspiracy theories.

  2. Always Right

    Well, JFK “stole” his presidential election so “we’re even” LMAO

    Now what about Hussien’s Birth Certificate.

    Anyone who doesn’t find something fishy about Obama spending hundreds of thousands of dollars fighting civil actions rather than $12.5o for a Birth Certificate…well, I’ve got some swamp land in FL for sale!

    And don’t give me that “Certificate of Birth” that’s been floating around the Internet.
    We all know that any 9 year old with access to a computer could have produced that.

    No, Hussein, just like Americans have to provide a birth certificate for an American passport, you’re gonna have to cough up a certified copy of your BIRTH CERTIFICATE…sooner or later…because “Grandma” says you were born in Kenya…

  3. radiodujour

    Funny cartoon! What everybody knows can’t buy a cup of coffee these days.

    Additional Media:

    Philip Berg’s case is still alive

    Webster Tarpley talks with Attorney Philip Berg about his case (08-570) still before the Supreme Court which questions whether Barack Obama is a natural born citizen and thus constitutionally qualified to be president of the United States. This case has been reported to be closed by hundreds of news sources and yet it here it appears on the Supreme Court docket scheduled for January 16, 2009.

    http://radiodujour.wordpress.com/2008/12/28/philip-bergs-case-is-still-alive/

  4. Ted

    The nation owes more than thanks to three unlikely modern day patriots: professional poker player, musician, and retired attorney, Leo Donofrio; life long Democrat and former Pennsylvania assistant attorney general, Phil Berg; and Soviet emigree and attorney, Dr. Orly Taitz (she’s also a dentist).

    While Mr. Donofrio painstakingly established the airtight case that BHO could not be an Article II “natural born citizen” (at BHO’s birth, dad was British/Kenyan, not American, citizen) Leo’s Stay of the 12/15/08 electoral college vote was denied by SCOTUS as procedurally unripe.

    Nevertheless, since no congressman and senator objected on 1/8/09 to Congress’ count and certification of the electoral vote which would have turned resolution of Obama’s eligibility issue over to Congress — rendering moot the Berg and Taitz (Lightfoot) cases — Berg finally does achieve standing on the issue of actual harm, to be addressed at the Friday 1/9/09 SCOTUS Conference on Writ of Certiorari. Obama’s failure to submit evidence of his constitutional qualification for the 1/9/09 conference will mean he cannot thereafter challenge Berg’s request to enjoin the 1/8/09 Congressional electoral count and certification, albeit retroactive, scheduled for SCOTUS conference Friday 1/16/09. Moreover, Chief Justice Roberts has scheduled a full Court conference on the Lightfoot case Friday 1/23/09 in the event there needs to be a Constitutionally mandated action, the Inauguration itself, to enjoin retroactively.

    Now that BHO is in checkmate and cannot be POTUS, he can be a patriot as well. He need not subject the nation to the expense and trauma of requiring SCOTUS to overrule his ‘Presidency’. BHO can and should voluntarily step down with Biden becoming Acting POTUS under the 20th Amendment, and under the agreement all potential claims by the Government for itself and on behalf of others against BHO are released.

  5. sportsone234

    Ted:

    I couldn’t agree with you more concerning Attorneys Donofrio, Berg, and Taitz … they are patriots.

    There are the many, many people who have devoted countless hours into the Obama natural born citizen saga. There are times when I am in awe at the amount of time so many have devoted in search of the truth. There are too many names to list here, but I’m sure you and I could easily come with a top ten list of heroes and our lists would be very closely matched.

    This country is fortunate to have so many citizens willing to sacrifice to preserve and protect our Constitution.

    As for BHO behaving like a patriot and putting his country ahead of his ambitions, I will not hold my breathe waiting.

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 )

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s