Showing posts with label Barack Obama. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Barack Obama. Show all posts

Tuesday, June 5, 2012

Sluts For Obama

Some in President Obama's camp are rewriting the old punch line "She's no lady; . . ." to end with "she's an Obama supporter." Susan McMillan Emry has started a site called "Rock the Slut Vote" to milk whatever voter anger is left in the Left from Rush Limbaugh "slut" comment he made earlier this year.

Emry offers various reasons for why "You might be a slut," including "if you've ever used contraception" or "if you're still downloading Dixie Chicks music" or "if you don't go to church." Lovely.

If she were an originalist (which I'm sure she's not), Emry would also include "if you are slovenly or ill dressed woman", which was the eighteenth century definition of a "slut", as used by the Founders. Jefferson, for example, once warned one of his daughters against appearing "dishabille" in public lest she be thought to be a "slut."

I suspect Embry will have about as much success in rehabilitating her four-letter word as the President's campaign will have with respect to his last four years.
Please note: The postings of "G. Morris", written by John K. Bush and which end in 2016, stated his views as of the dates of posting and should not be understood as current assertions of his views. The postings, which have not been altered since they came to an end, remain on this blog to preserve the historical record. In 2017, Mr. Bush took a position that precludes further public political comments or endorsements. He will no longer be contributing to this blog.

Thursday, May 10, 2012

Our Troops Are Not Fighting For The One

The most startling aspect of President Barack Obama's flip-lop on gay marriage is his slip about exactly for whom he thinks American troops are fighting.  Obama told ABC,

when I think about those soldiers or airmen or marines or sailors who are out there fighting on my behalf and yet feel constrained, even now that Don't Ask Don't Tell is gone, because they are not able to commit themselves in a marriage, at a certain point I've just concluded that for me personally it is important for me to go ahead and affirm that I think same sex couples should be able to get married.

(Emphasis added.)

It's a revelatory comment.  No doubt all those soldiers, airmen, marines and soldiers were shocked to learn that they are fighting on behalf of Obama. Most of them thought that they were fighting for America, for the citizens of our country and most specifically for their friends, families and neighbors.

Obama's self-absorption is something to behold, even in the context of a profession that draws narcissists.  Nonetheless, this peak into his mind is astonishing for its utter lack of modesty.  The most charitable construction is that soldiers fight for their country, and Obama feels that he epitomizes or symbolizes America.  That's still pretty grandiose.

We knew that Obama is a narcissist just as we knew he has always supported gay marriage. Neither of these propositions is in any way surprising.

Still, the assertion that our soldiers are fighting "on my [Obama's] behalf "does not sound like something the elected leader of a democracy should think, let alone say. It sounds dictatorial.  And creepy.



Tuesday, May 1, 2012

WaPo Gives Obama Four Pinnochios For "Whopper" About Sherman Minton Bridge

The Washington Post has given President Barack Obama four Pinnochios for remarks about the Sherman Minton Bridge that bore no resemblance to the truth. This is not Obama's first truthiness problem with an Ohio River bridge.

Recall that last September, the Post gave Obama three Pinnochios for his remarks about the Brent Spence Bridge in Northern Kentucky. Obama made a big show for standing on a bridge that connects the home state of House Majority Leader John Boehner to that of Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell. Obama tried to blame the crumbling bridge on Republican obstruction of his job bill - even though there is bipartisan support to fix the bridge and construction is scheduled to start in 2015, regardless of the jobs bill.

Yesterday Obama blamed Republican obstructionism for preventing the Sherman Minton from being repaired.  According to Obama,

There are bridges between Kentucky and Ohio where some of the key Republican leadership come from, where folks are having to do detours an extra hour, hour-and-a-half drive every day on their commute because these bridges don’t work. They still said no.”

As the Post points out -- and as most everyone in Kentucky and Indiana knows -- the Sherman Minton is open; it has been for months.  It was finished ahead of schedule. And without a dime from Obama's jobs bill.

It is embarrassing, really, that Obama's staff does such a bad job fact-checking that they make the man look look like he's dissembling about something that the citizenry can verify first hand, every time they commute to and from work.  This sloppiness with basic facts reflects either incompetence on the part of the administration or an indifference to the truth. Or both.


H/T:  HotAir

Tuesday, July 26, 2011

On Obama's Speech

President Barack Obama is losing his touch, or at least his handlers are.  In last night's speech, the shot was framed so as to fit his ears precisely in the door frame behind him. Not to focus on form over substance, but it was very distracting.  Just another reminder that the magic has worn off.

That didn't stop the president, however, from attempting a sleight of hand.  He invoked his standard rationale for class warfare and the need for the rich to sacrifice.  Then he casually mentioned the number $250,000 and in the next sentence referred to millionaires and billionaires.  Since when is someone who makes $250,000 a "millionare"?  Or "billionaire?"  Never mind the fact that many people who earn $250,000 are actually small business owners who file as individuals -- the very people who need to start hiring if this vaunted recovery is ever to take place.

Obama's speech was also noteworthy for his code language.  Tax hikes are now "revenue."  Whenever Obama refers to "revenue" it is time to listen up, because he's getting ready to sock it to so-called rich.

Then there was his invocation of a "balanced approach" -- which is in turn code for tax hikes.  The odd thing about the phrase"balanced approach" is its resemblance to the Republican plan to "Cut, Cap and Balance."  For Republicans, "balance" refers to a balanced budget amendment to the U.S. constitution -- something two-thirds of Americans support.  For Obama,however, "balanced" just means more taxes.

Monday, June 27, 2011

Almost Time for the McConnell - Obama Debt Chat

Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell will meet with President Barack Obama at 5:00 today to discuss raising the nation's debt ceiling. We won't have to wonder what McConnell's position is:  he spells it for CNN. My favorite line: "The obvious solution is for Washington to make the kind of tough choices in its own budget that millions of Americans have been forced to impose on themselves over the past two years."  

Later today, I will sit down with President Barack Obama to discuss his request to increase the nation's debt ceiling, and I will make a request of my own: What, Mr. President, are you prepared to do about the massive deficits and debt that have grown dramatically on your watch?

What Republicans want is simple: We want to cut spending now, we want to cap runaway spending in the future and we want to save our entitlements and our country from bankruptcy by requiring the nation to balance its budget. We want to finally get our economy growing again at a pace that will lead to significant job growth.

The Democrats' response has been a mystifying call for more stimulus spending and huge tax hikes on American job creators. That's not serious, and it is my hope that the president will take those off the table today so that we can have a serious discussion about our country's economic future.

The president claimed last week at a New York fundraiser that he is prepared to bring down the nation's staggeringly high deficit and debt by trillions of dollars, but rather than provide any details, he only listed the things he refuses to cut. This is a problem I hope to raise with him today.

At some point, Democrats need to realize that the reason our nation's debt has skyrocketed 35% over the past two years is that government spending is out of control.

America does not face a debt crisis because we tax too little, but because Washington spends too much. And tax hikes can't pass the Congress. Not only is there bipartisan opposition, the consequences of massive new tax hikes would be fewer jobs.

The president spoke in his weekly address Saturday about wanting to help manufacturers create jobs. But we know that raising taxes on these same manufacturers, particularly in this economy, will have the opposite effect.

The obvious solution is for Washington to make the kind of tough choices in its own budget that millions of Americans have been forced to impose on themselves over the past two years. Yet President Obama and his allies in Congress remain unwilling to concede the point. Once they get their hands on taxpayer dollars, they seem incapable of letting go.

The $830 billion stimulus bill is just one example. When Democrats passed it, they made two predictions: first, that it would keep unemployment below 8%, and second, that it was a one-time cash infusion meant to prevent a wider crisis. Two years later, unemployment hovers above 9%, and Democrats now demand that we add new stimulus funding. Their commitment to spending and tax hikes is so deeply held, it seems, that they don't even recognize what terrible shape our economy is in and the fact that tax and spend policies of the past two years have made it worse.

Nor do they seem to recognize that the voters are asking for a different approach. Americans didn't elect dozens of additional Republicans to the House of Representatives last November because they wanted their taxes raised. They sent them here to reverse the runaway spending policies that failed.

Since the day the stimulus was signed, Washington has added $3.5 trillion to the national debt and roughly 2 million Americans have lost their jobs. More recently, a slew of troubling economic indicators and dire warnings from credit agencies about the dangers of our debt show that the time for serious action is now.

We have seen the consequences of giving Washington a blank check -- and we think it's time Washington make some of the hard choices that the average American has made over the past two and a half years.

Tuesday, February 15, 2011

Editorial Reaction to Obama's Budget

Editorials across the country are ripping the Obama administration's proposed budget. (The Courier-Journal, in contrast, could not be bothered to write an editorial about the budget.)

Here are some excerpts from papers that usually line up behind The One:

Washington Post: "The president punted. Having been given the chance, the cover and the push by the fiscal commission he created to take bold steps to raise revenue and curb entitlement spending, President Obama, in his fiscal 2012 budget proposal, chose instead to duck. To duck, and to mask some of the ducking with the sort of budgetary gimmicks he once derided."

USA Today: "He whiffed." “President Obama likes to talk about those ‘Sputnik moments’ when the nation rises to difficult challenges like the one posed by the Soviet space program in the 1950s. On Monday, he had a chance to turn his federal budget proposal into his own such moment. He whiffed. …"

Los Angeles Times: "The proposal was a remarkably tame response to Washington's fiscal problems, not the bold statement about belt-tightening that the White House had suggested was coming. Yet the biggest shortcoming is that it all but ignored the most important long-term financial challenge, which is the growing cost of entitlements such as Medicare and Medicaid.”

The Detroit News channeled those whose New Year's willpower is fading: "What we're getting from the Obama Administration is one of those weight loss programs that pretend it can shrink your waistline while allowing you to eat whatever you like. In this case, the president assures us we can gorge on Keynesian treats and still someday get back into our Clinton-era jeans.”

And for a take from the Wall Street Journal -- admittedly no friend of Obama's -- but a great turn of phrase: "This was supposed to be the moment we were all waiting for. After three years of historic deficits that have added almost $4.5 trillion to the national debt, President Obama was finally going to get serious about fiscal discipline. Instead, what landed on Congress's doorstep on Monday was a White House budget that increases deficits above the spending baseline for the next two years. Hosni Mubarak was more in touch with reality last Thursday night.” (Emphasis added.) ("Hosni Mubarak"; that's gotta hurt.)

Wednesday, October 27, 2010

Obama Comments on the Neck Stomping

President Barack Obama met with a group of Demo-bloggers today, and commented on the assault of a Moveon.org member by a Rand Paul supporter. From Huffington Post:

Well, look, I think that one of the things that I've always tried to promote is civility in politics. I think we can disagree vigorously without being disagreeable. And what we saw on the video was an example of people's passions just getting out of hand in ways that are disturbing.

In fairness, I don't expect every candidate to be responsible for every single supporter's actions, but I do think that all of us have an obligation to set a tone where we say the other side is -- may be wrong but it's not evil, because when you start going down that path of demonizing folks, then these kinds of incidents are more likely to occur. And my expectation in the remainder of this campaign is that all candidates out there are a little more careful about making sure that they're framing the debate around issues and sending a clear message to their supporters that our democracy works when we disagree, we debate, we argue, it gets contentious, but that there are certain lines we don't cross.

Monday, May 31, 2010

Welcome Back, Carter

It has been obvious for months that the the Obama administration is just a slightly hipper version of the Carter administration. This point is underscored by Obama's non-response to the BP oil spill. Unlike George W. Bush's reaction to Hurricane Katrina, Obama didn't even bother to do a cursory fly-over; it took him five weeks to actually show up.

Obama has lost "progressives" like James Carville and Maureen Dowd as well as RINOs like Peggy Noonan for his seeming indifference and incompetence. Now he is on the verge of losing the Mainstream Media, too.

Like Jimmy Carter and the Iranian hostage crisis, the daily headline has become how many days have elapsed since the BP oil spill began -- how many days has the administration failed to fix the problem at issue or manifest any leadership to to try to improve the situation. The show Nightline was formed after the hostage crisis and originally had the name "America Held Hostage: Day (fill in the blank). All that remains to complete the analogy is a news series dedicated to the oil spill, starring dead pelicans and sobbing fishermen.

We passed day 40 this weekend. That is, the oil spill has now lasted longer than Lent.

Today is the 42nd day since the oil rig exploded, but the Obama administration still does not know what hit it.


Friday, April 9, 2010

Ed Levi's Friend Announces His Retirement

Justice John Paul Stevens' announcement today that he will retire at the end of this Supreme Court term brought to mind a conversation I had with former President Gerald Ford about Stevens in the mid-1980s. I had the honor to sit next to Ford at the right place and the right time: the end of the head table at a banquet of seemingly interminable length. Since Ford was on the very end of the row, I was his only immediate dinner conversationalist, thus making him captive to my questioning for most of the evening. David Frost I was not, but Ford good naturedly indulged me nonetheless.

After passing several minutes discussing the former President's early years, particularly those spent at Yale Law School (Did you know he coached the boxing and football teams as well as the cheerleaders?), there was a lull in the conversation. At that time President Reagan's appointments to the judiciary were in the news -- remember the days of Judge Bork? -- and all the talk was that Attorney General Meese and the Reagan White House were laser focused on finding judges who would not be activists. With this in mind, I asked President Ford what criteria he had used to decide on his only appointment to the Supreme Court -- Justice Stevens. Ford replied simply: "None, other than that Attorney General Levi wanted him."

Apparently Stevens made the jump from Seventh Circuit judge to the nation's highest court because he was in the right place at the right time: both he and Edward Levi (former University of Chicago president) were friends from Chicago. Obviously Stevens had excelled as both a lawyer and jurist and was well qualified, but Ford's response made clear to me just how detached he had been during the Supreme Court Justice selection process. The result was a Supreme Court Justice who is one of the most liberal members of the Court and who, though appointed by a Republican, chose to wait until a Democrat was President before retiring from office. Don't count on President Obama following the same disengaged approach in choosing Justice Stevens' successor.
Please note: The postings of "G. Morris", written by John K. Bush and which end in 2016, stated his views as of the dates of posting and should not be understood as current assertions of his views. The postings, which have not been altered since they came to an end, remain on this blog to preserve the historical record. In 2017, Mr. Bush took a position that precludes further public political comments or endorsements. He will no longer be contributing to this blog.

Thursday, March 11, 2010

Obama Attacks McConnell

President Barack Obama sounds obsessed with Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell. Politico details Obama's petty attacks and paranoia.

For the second time this week, the president has called out Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell personally after the leader suggested Democrats who back Obama’s health care proposals should fear GOP retribution in November.

“I heard the Republican leader of the Senate the other day – he’s warning Democrats, ‘You better be careful about voting for this; it could hurt you,’” the president said in a speech to 400 invitees who packed into a high school auditorium just outside of St. Louis.

“I don’t know how sincere the Republican leader is about the best interests of Democrats. [But] he’s been very generous with advice.”

When someone hooted from the back of the room during a Wednesday night fundraiser in St. Louis, Obama stopped mid-speech, and quipped, “Was that Mitch McConnell? ... They don’t like it when we’re talking the truth.”

Wednesday’s remarks tracked closely with those Obama made on a Monday trip to Arcadia University in suburban Philadelphia, when he said, “The echo chamber is telling members of Congress, ‘wait, think about the politics — instead of thinking about doing the right thing’ … That’s what Mitch McConnell said.”





Wednesday, January 27, 2010

McConnell's Take on Obama's SOTU

Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell has a reaction to President Barack Obama's State of the Union -- aside from the responsive smirk when Obama promised to invited the Republican leadership for "monthly" meetings:

The President is always welcome at the Capitol, especially at a time when there is so much important work to be done on behalf of the American people.

The President talked about jobs tonight. This is a welcome change in focus after the President and his administration spent nearly an entire year pursuing a partisan health care plan that would have spent trillions of dollars we don't have rather than on a plan for getting Americans back to work. I'm hopeful the administration's new focus on the economy will lead it to say no to more spending and debt, more bailouts, and more government.

The President's words about the importance of deficit reduction are timely. The times require that we build upon these modest proposals. Americans are concerned about what kind of country we will leave to our children. The administration could address this concern right away by directing unspent Stimulus and TARP funds to pay down the federal deficit, and it could implement a true spending freeze. It could also assure families and small businesses that their taxes will not go up at the end of the year, as currently planned.

The administration could also reassure Americans who are still rattled by the attempted Christmas Day bombing by vowing to make a priority of preventing the next terrorist attack, not treating captured terrorists like common criminals so we can place them in a civilian court. Americans have a right to find out everything captured terrorists know in order to prevent future terrorist attacks.

Americans are concerned about government spending, debt, jobs, and keeping the homeland safe. They expect us to focus on these core issues until we get them right. In the year ahead, there is much work to be done, and the task before us is clear. We need to get Americans back to work and remain focused on keeping America secure and putting our nation back on the road to prosperity. Republicans look forward to working with the President on these shared goals.

Trey Reacts to Obama's SOTU

Here's Secretary of State Trey Grayson's reaction to President Barack Obama's State of the Union:

As he always does, President Obama delivered a great speech tonight. However, his proposals amount to mere lip service to the massive problems facing our country and do little to address our skyrocketing deficits and national debt.

We need a spending freeze right now – not next year. We need across the board cuts to the double-digit increases in discretionary spending we’ve seen this year over last year. We should hold spending at FY 2009 levels – before the massive increases took place.

Further, it’s disheartening that while the President talks about making American businesses more competitive and creating jobs, he advocates policies like a massive national energy tax that will make our businesses less competitive and drive jobs overseas, especially in coal-dependent states like Kentucky. We must all remember that the government does not create jobs. Government should get out of the way and free America’s small businesses to innovate, grow and create jobs.

I hope the President is serious about wanting bipartisan cooperation, and I hope Democrats in Congress will stop their go-it-alone, government-knows-best approach and begin to consider more common sense, conservative, fiscally responsible approaches to finding real solutions to our problems.

Sunday, January 3, 2010

View From the U.K.

The Telegraph has a great piece on Obama and the terrorist who tried to ruin Christmas.

Complacency, faux moralising and partisan shots at Republicans. It was a neat summary of where Obama is going wrong after the Christmas Day debacle when the Nigerian knicker bomber managed to waltz onto a Detroit-bound flight.

For a man who campaigned denouncing the politicisation of national security under President George W Bush, it is worth noting how intensely political Obama's treatment of what might henceforth be known as Underpantsgate has been.

His White House recognised its political vulnerability more readily than it comprehended the level of danger faced by Americans.

. . .

The incompetence of the US intelligence bureaucracy is not the only thing that makes Underpantsgate so damaging for Obama. More serious is his failure to understand or acknowledge the nature of the enemy - and to view war as mere politics.

Really, the Brits were kinder to Obama than the U.S. media would have been had the episode taken place under the Bush administration: there would have been complaints that the president "failed to connect the dots"; complaints that he should cut his vacation short and rush back to Washington; and then the inevitable Congressional hearing followed by a thousand page report.


Wednesday, December 9, 2009

Tiger/Obama Laugh Of The Day

The Hill reports:

In a statement given to The Hill's ITK, Rep. Joe Baca (D-Calif.) said, “In light of the recent developments surrounding Tiger Woods and his family, I will not pursue legislation awarding him the Congressional Gold Medal this session."

One of the comments:

Maybe Rep. Baca can nominate Tiger for the Nobel Peace Prize!
Please note: The postings of "G. Morris", written by John K. Bush and which end in 2016, stated his views as of the dates of posting and should not be understood as current assertions of his views. The postings, which have not been altered since they came to an end, remain on this blog to preserve the historical record. In 2017, Mr. Bush took a position that precludes further public political comments or endorsements. He will no longer be contributing to this blog.

Wednesday, December 2, 2009

An Obama Cover to Collect

It would not normally be newsworthy that President Barack Obama will appear on yet another magazine cover -- no. 12,576 of his administation

But this cover, on Golf Digest, partners the president with pig Tiger Woods, under the headline, "10 Tips Obama Can Take From Tiger."

Tip number one: hide the golf clubs from the your wife.

h/t Instapundit

Wednesday, November 18, 2009

Grayson Condemns Obama 9/11 Show Trials

Secretary of State and U.S. Senate candidate Trey Grayson has condemned the Obama administration's plan to use civilian courts to try the master-mind of the 9/11 attacks, Khalid Sheikh Mohammad, and his co-conspirators.

In an email blast, Grayson states that he

disagree[s] strongly with this decision and have launched a petition against this policy on my website. I hope you will sign the petition to President Obama today and join me in opposition to bringing captured terrorist suspects to U.S. soil for prosecution in civilian courts instead of prosecuting them using military commissions outside our borders. I see no need to threaten the security of Americans and spend untold additional millions of dollars trying to mitigate those risks on our own soil. If I am elected to the U.S. Senate I will support measures such as Sen. Jim DeMint’s legislation to extend the ban on moving Guantanamo detainees to the U.S.

It is a welcome relief to see the Grayson campaign finally focus on an important issue of national security, rather than how long his opponents have lived in Kentucky.

No word yet on how Grayson's opponent in the Republican primary Dr. Rand Paul views the use of civilian courts to try foreign terrorists.

If Paul gets his way, however, we will soon hear he and Grayson compare their positions on this and other issues. Paul today called for Grayson to debate him: "I challenge Mr. Grayson to debate before any impartial group. Several universities and media outlets have expressed an interest and I've indicated that I relish the idea of debate."

Meanwhile, President Obama -- flailing to defend his decision to try KSM in New York City's federal court -- gave a curious lesson on the rule of law to the Communist Chinese: Obama promised that the terrorists will be convicted. In addition to tainting the jury pool, Obama made the whole judicial exercise look like a sham with a pre-ordained conclusion.

Thursday, March 5, 2009

Obama's New New Deal Rolls Out The Barrel . . . Moving Downhill Fast!

President Obama's tax and spend assault on capitalism continues to have a devastating toll on the stock markets. Today, stocks resumed their slide. Drudge Report calls it "The Hemorrhaging". When we last checked, the Dow was down over 200 points -- easily erasing the gains from yesterday.

In their zeal to "stimulate" the economy, the Democrats ignore the first cardinal rule of tending to a sick patient -- do no harm. The Chinese government leadership seems to get it, having announced there will be no new "stimulus" package in their country.

It's a scary day when the Communist government in Red China is more conservative than Democrats running things in Washington, D.C.

Update: Here is the reality of the "change" brought about by Obama's economic policies, as reported by Yahoo! Finance:

The Dow is now down 24% year-to-date, while the S&P 500 has fallen slightly less since the start of the year. The Nasdaq is down almost 17% for the year.

Meanwhile, the S&P 400 Mid-cap Index and Russell 2000 Small-cap Index are showing year-to-date losses of 23% and 29%, respectively.
Please note: The postings of "G. Morris", written by John K. Bush and which end in 2016, stated his views as of the dates of posting and should not be understood as current assertions of his views. The postings, which have not been altered since they came to an end, remain on this blog to preserve the historical record. In 2017, Mr. Bush took a position that precludes further public political comments or endorsements. He will no longer be contributing to this blog.

Sunday, November 2, 2008

Obama On Coal: We'll Bankrupt You

Sen. Barack Obama on an issue that is vital to the economic future of Kentucky and the energy independence of America: coal.

So if somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can; it’s just that it will bankrupt them because they’re going to be charged a huge sum for all that greenhouse gas that’s being emitted.

That will also generate billions of dollars that we can invest in solar, wind, biodiesel and other alternative energy approaches.


The only thing I’ve said with respect to coal, I haven’t been some coal booster. What I have said is that for us to take coal off the table as a ideological matter as opposed to saying if technology allows us to use coal in a clean way, we should pursue it.

So if somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can.

It’s just that it will bankrupt them.

Obama has never been able to hypnotize Kentuckians. Pennsylvanians, Virginians and West Virginians and Ohioans need to listen up. He wants to bankrupt an entire industry.

Thursday, October 30, 2008

Palin Supporters Have A Message For The LA Times; Do You Have A Message For Laura Ingraham?


What is it on that tape of Barack Obama at Rashid Khalidi's party that the Los Angeles Times does not want us to see? If you know, Laura Ingraham has posted a way for you to get out the word:

HELP US LOCATE THE LA TIMES' TERRORIST PARTY TAPE! We have set up a toll-free hotline--(877) 684-1371--that you can call to leave a message if you have any information on the videotape the LA Times refuses to release of Obama attending a 2003 party for Rashid Khalidi, former racist/terrorist hack for Palestinian president Yasser Arafat, along with other assorted terror nuts like Bill Ayers. You can also mail any evidence to:Talk Radio 1314 B Center Drive Medford, OR 97501 Anyone who leaves a voicemail or mails a package will remain anonymous.

Tuesday, October 28, 2008

Steve Calabresi on Judges, Obama-style

Federalist Society founder Steve Calabresis hits hard on an issue that Sen. John McCain has dropped: the sort of judges that Sen. Barack Obama will nominate if he is elected.

Obama does not think that a judge is a neutral umpire who enforces the rules of the contract, statute or constitution at issue. To the contrary, Obama wants judges who can empathise, but only with the plaintiff:

Speaking in July 2007 at a conference of Planned Parenthood, he said: "[W]e need somebody who's got the heart, the empathy, to recognize what it's like to be a young teenage mom. The empathy to understand what it's like to be poor, or African-American, or gay, or disabled, or old. And that's the criteria by which I'm going to be selecting my judges."

He thinks that the Warren Court did not go far enough because it failed to create a positive right to "economic justice," that is, a constitutional right to the redistribution of wealth.

Here's the upshot of what we can expect from Obama judges:

a federal constitutional right to welfare; a federal constitutional mandate of affirmative action wherever there are racial disparities, without regard to proof of discriminatory intent; a right for government-financed abortions through the third trimester of pregnancy; the abolition of capital punishment and the mass freeing of criminal defendants; ruinous shareholder suits against corporate officers and directors; and approval of huge punitive damage awards, like those imposed against tobacco companies, against many legitimate businesses such as those selling fattening food.

If he is elected, Barry can serve for eight years, max. Judges, on the other hand, have life tenure. That's what's at stake next Tuesday.