In response to:

The Liberal Attack on the Court

inkling_revival Wrote: Apr 08, 2012 7:18 PM
Nobody even suggested Obama had no right to disagree. What people are noting is that his disagreement takes the form of a very clear factual error, made all the more embarrassing by the fact that he claims -- in exaggerated fashion -- to have been a lecturer in Constitutional law. It's an error that would cost any first-year law student an instant F in Con Law. Obama is far worse than Gingrich. Gingrich claimed he would ignore decisions not based on law. I maintain that that's his right. Obama attempted to claim that 200 years of Constitutional law was invalid. That best thing you can call that is a brain fart.
Wootan Wrote: Apr 08, 2012 9:39 PM
You believe presidents have the right to ignore the courts? You think Nixon had the right to ignore the SC when it ruled he had to turn over the tapes?

Lordy.
Back in the 1960s, conservatives angry at the Supreme Court's rulings under its liberal chief justice put up billboards with the message: "Impeach Earl Warren." Today, you can order T-shirts and buttons with an updated demand: "Impeach John Roberts."

In fighting a war, the danger is always that you will come to resemble your enemy, adopting his basest tactics purely for the sake of victory. That happens in politics as well, as President Barack Obama and his allies are now demonstrating.

Obama has done his best to undermine respect for the Supreme Court on more than one occasion. After it ruled that corporations...