Liberal Media Calling For America To “Impeach the Supreme Court”

If the Supreme Court rules against Obamacare, liberal media columnist David R Dow of the Daily Beast demands they be impeached.

Ah, it appears the hysterics are starting to reach a boiling point for liberals in America these days as speculation grows of a Supreme Court decision that may throw out the Obamacare legislation by June of this year.  Take a look at what David Dow over at the Daily Beast says:

…A decision striking down the health care law would be a statement that the only people entitled to health care are the people who can afford it.

…But there’s no question that he was right to say that impeachment is an option for justices who undermine constitutional values. There are other options, as well. We might amend the Constitution to establish judicial term limits. Or we might increase the number of justices to dilute the influence of its current members (though FDR could tell you how that turned out). In the end, however, it is the duty of the people to protect the Constitution from the court. Social progress cannot be held hostage by five unelected men.

 

Note the use of the term “social progress” by Mr. Dow.  So according this Mr. Dow of the Daily Beast, he is complaining of a “partisan” Supreme Court reviewing perhaps the single most partisan and far reaching piece of legislation to have been passed in the history of the United States.  Social Security and Medicare both had strong bi-partisan support.  Obamacare did not – far from it.  Every Republican voted against the legislation in both the House and the Senate – and even Democrats who were unwilling to support the bill then received what amounted to Congressional bribes such as the “Cornhusker Kickback” that saw millions upon millions of taxpayer dollars being used by the Obama administration to buy votes.

Just this past week there are further reports of doctors curtailing tests and treatments in an effort to “save costs” under the beginnings of Obamacare.   If one is too old or too sick – Obamacare is the kind of legislation that states the needs of the many far outweigh the needs of the few or the one – so in essence, LET THEM DIE.  And yet, Mr. Dow would call that “social progress”.

We are reminded of Barack Obama’s own words on the subject when he described end of life care as reaching a point where we need to just “give them a pill” and let them die.  Yes – “social progress”.

America, this November you have a direct opportunity to tell Barack Obama,  David Dow, and their fellow liberal Democrats what you think of their “social progress”.  And as for the United States Supreme Court – if they do indeed vote down Obamacare in all its corruptive Big Government glory,  they will be doing their duty as the Founding Fathers intended.  Now THAT is true social progress.

________________

LINK

750 days ago by in News | You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
About the

Be courteous to all, but intimate with few, and let those few be well tried before you give them your confidence. -G. Washington

23 Comments to Liberal Media Calling For America To “Impeach the Supreme Court”
    • cobra
    • I think the chances of Obamacare being struck down just increased, as the judges do not like to be dis-respected.
      Furthermore, he may have pissed off enough repubics to start his own impeachment process.

    • Fred
    • Obama is pandering to the stupid with his latest comments. He is also letting his Marxist mask slip a little. using strange terms like social Darminism. White House Insider is on a huge streak. What’s next?

    • werbaz neutronName
    • Mobs in the media, mobs in academia, mobs in the streets, mobs in the White House.

      The Constitution was written in a way to protect the individual from the actions of mobs.

      I hope ALL members of the Supreme Court do their duty. I expect the conservative ones will: I hope the others take the long view and realize the position of historical and constitutional trust invested in them.

      I hope we see no small minded people there.

    • SallyAl
    • “Note the use of the term “social progress” by Mr. Dow. So according this Mr. Dow of the Daily Caller”

      UM, probably ought to fix this. He is from the Daily Beast. At least the Daily Caller pretends to be on our side most of the time.

    • truthandjustice
    • Yes, let’s hope once again, their evil strategies will backfire – I would think as others do, that his arrogant, intimidating type remarks will finally rile up more patriotic judges to really start fighting back instead of silence, hoping the coming elections will solve things. They all need to wake up and realize the seriousness of this time in history for America like the WHI and WSI did – even if they were duped in the beginning. They must swallow their “pride” about being wrong & be brave — you know, like the song, “home of the brave, land of the free”!!!! We won’t have that land of the free anymore if the Communists win.
      Hope everyone checked out Breitbart and World Net Daily (wnd.com) lately – Breitbart has stuff re “vetting” that the WHI talked about (Chicago, Jarrett, etc.) & the stuff on Shariff Arpaio expanding his investigation to probe the crimes re the 2008 elections that the WHI alluded to also. Apparently have some Hillary supporters who have testified, etc. We need to start nailing them on their crimes soon. At least now we have some encouragement.

    • ShainS
    • Some phrases liberal fascists despise: “co-equal branch”, “separation of powers”, “checks and balances”, “enumerated powers”, et. al.

      They’ve ignored and trampled on these concepts, and wipe their a$$e$ with the Constitution, but — although on life-support — it’s still barely breathing … they won’t be satisfied until we become Greece, South Africa, or something.

    • Publius
    • Let’s start calling Obama’s signature legislation “Just-Give-Them-a-Pill-and-Let-Them-Die-Care.”

      Like the man known as Obama, Mr. Dow was clearly not educated in the United States, or he would know from civics classes in elementary school that the Supreme Court interprets constitutional issues.

      My money is on a 7 to 2 SCOTUS ruling against legislation. I think Obama’s berserko rantings this week may have swayed Breyer and Sotomayor. (I can dream, can’t I??)

      • USA4ever
      • I share your optimism. But remember that Obama appointed Sotomayor and Kagan specifically to rubber-stamp his agenda. Both appear to be rank ideologues, especially Kagan.

        Though I would love to see a 7-2 smackdown, I’ll take a 5-4 just as well.

      • Rurik
      • Well, if Butchie Kagan violated SC practic by leaking reports to teh COOTUS, in the face of all precedent, might not that be grounds for impeaching her and getting that toad off the bench?To demonstrate that a “lifetime” appointee may be removed for cause would send a salutary message throughout the Judiciary, particularly the Ninth Circus Court, and if done for a cause protecting legitimate SC interests, would be harder to oppose.

    • ThroughTheLookingGlass
    • For the time being, where is a “like” button when we need one here? Without the benefit of the magic button, consider this a call for drinks all around on me! You, too, UM!

      I’ll reserve dancing on the bar for the day Barry ousted!

    • Chunkdog
    • I don’t think it really matters what the Supreme Court decides concerning Obamacare. Even if they vote it down Obama will let everyone know that he thinks it is constitutional and he is going to instruct all his department heads and cabinet members to be prepared to implement it.

      I think we all know this is his plan. Congress hasn’t stopped him, why would he think the SC could?

      • Stirrin the B.S.
      • You’re on the right path, but your timing is off. To overrule the SC would initiate a huge constitutional crisis, that not even the LSM could ignore. He can’t afford to do that before the election.

        If it is voted down, Oblasphme will use it as a campaign tool. Remember, he has nothing to run FOR, he has only perceived grievances to run AGAINST – against congress, against the SC, which will all be morphed and focused as being against Repubs in congress and conservatives on the bench. Then he tops it all off with the race card – anyone against him is a racist.

        Now, don’t forget his “flexibility” with a second term. Then he might very well do as you suggest – implement it via executive fiat. He signed the order that enables him to do so on March 16th.

        I shudder to think of all of the people who are eagerly awaiting his flexible status if he is re-elected.

Leave A Response

* Required

-->