Gibbs: 'Supreme Court Shouldn't Have Been Uncomfortable At SOTU, It Was Their Decision'

[willsl321]

It's fine that Obama disagrees, but straight up calling the supreme court out in front of the assembled government is an inappropriate thing to do and it shows a huge lack of respect. It was wrong when Reagan did it too.

[boots920]

Off topic but look at a 600 year chart of silver, it peaked in 1477 @ 850 US an oz.

For some reason its been manipulated down in price for 600 years ??? Apparently its rarer than gold above ground.

I just point that out because there's more to it than what we perceive.

[QuasiEvilScott]

No one has the right to be comfortable.

No one has the right to be un-offended.

Why do I get the impression that when people discuss politics or culture - somehow these two things are presumed to be?

People disagree. Always have, always will.

[brabon1]

note sure why we are talking gold

what we should be talking is why roberts and alito are not being impeached for lying before congress

i suggest you all read the transcripts of their confirmation hearings

they lied

they have no right being on the highest court in the land

[TheHealthySkeptic]

I agree.

At the time of their nom/confirmations I thought Alito & Roberts 2B fair minded, reasonable choices for the Supreme Court guided by the law & constitution.

They have proven 2B extremely partisan in a branch of government that absolutely CANNOT afford to be partisan in any way, shape or form.

Roberts has proven this without a doubt w/his comments and whining about the State of the Union address.

Do your job without getting your feelings hurt by simple disagreement jack-ass!

[brabon1]

he and alito are snakes in judges robes

forget congress, the roberts court alone will turn over the government to the corporate interests

[Govtflu]

gobbs, obama, justice whoever.. all clowns.

[rumpole33]

justice roberts was a multi-millionaire corporate lawyer who gave corporations the same freedome of speech as an individual.

now, after having retired as a lawyer, roberts has a new career as a crybaby.

[mintvagoo]

The sitting conservatives on the SCOTUS have made a mockery of the US legal system. They are a fine representation of the GOP's three ring circus and the knuckle draggers that comprise it.

[dfrutled]

If you look at the history of Presidents they all scold the SC. Heck, FDR actually got so mad at the decisions he openly tried to increase the number of Justices to 15 just so he could put in the ones that would vote his way. (in favor of the New Deal)

P.S. This recent decision was HORRIBLE. Reminds me of Dred Scott, well not that bad but it was bad.

P.S.S. I think this Gibss guy is the best pres sec I haven seen in decades. The guy has a bright future in politics.

[sklanger]

Comparing Obama's jab to FDR's court-packing plan isn't exactly flattering.

The Court's decision was "horrible" only if you're an anti-free speech zealot.

[mrbhave]

If Roberts doesn't like the protocol, why does he continue to wear that black dress?

[dafttool]

Roberts is way out of line here. Obama is hardly the first president to use his State of the Union to chastise the Supreme Court. For instance, Reagan blasted his Supreme Court during his State Of the Union over school prayer. If Roberts is going to play like he cares about proper decorum, then he needs to learn to shut up with his baseless criticisms about HIS/our president.

[sklanger]

"For instance, Reagan blasted his Supreme Court during his State Of the Union over school prayer."

Which is of course, false. Reagan didn't call out the justices. He didn't even mention the Court by name. He mentioned children and "their lost right to acknowledge God in their classrooms" in passing, and only obliquely.

He certainly didn't "blast" the Supreme Court. That's a severe mischaracterization of what he said.

Maybe you should refrain from mindlessly repeating liberal talking points.

[dafttool]

F off. If you think what I have to say is simply regurgitated mindless talking points, then you clearly have conspiratorial issues. Did the big, bad liberals get together last night and then e-mail me what to write today in anticipation of this video being released?

You have your characterization of blasting the Supremes, and I have my own. That doesn't make either one of us better than the other. Take your ego-driven superiority complex elsewhere.

[sklanger]

I quoted the part where Reagan refers to school prayer. And he does not mention the Supreme Court. He can't "blast" something he didn't mention. You can say he's being subtle -- but there's nothing subtle about a "blast."

So either you're dishonestly mischaracterizing what Reagan said, or you're mindlessly repeating something you thought was true, but wasn't.

It doesn't take a "conspiracy" for you to repeat dumb talking points. It just takes dimwittedness, clearly something you have in spades.

[dafttool]

Again with the name calling and playing like you are somehow superior. Grow up.

"He can't "blast" something he didn't mention."

How naive of you. Obviously he did "blast" them, because with my brief statement "For instance, Reagan blasted his Supreme Court during his State Of the Union over school prayer," you knew exactly what speech I was referring to over 25 yrs later.

[sklanger]

Funny how you're whining about name calling when you started your reply with "F off."

And no, you can't "blast" something you didn't mention or call out by name. Knowing that Reagan mentioned school prayer in a SOTU and that you mischaracterized it does not make your mischaracterization true.

That's like saying Obama must be a Muslim, because hey, people know exactly what is being alluded to when they emphasize HUSSEIN as his middle name.

You're owned. Stop replying.

[TrollBuster9090]

"You're owned. Stop replying."

Hahah! Why? Because your fragile little ego can't take it when you don't get the last word? You've definitely got some issues.

A dollar says you won't be able to restrain yourself from responding to this comment.

[dafttool]

Wow. You really need to get over yourself. "F Off"? That was fairly well deserved after you called me mindless. You replied to me. Selective memory much?

What Reagan said about the Supreme Court decision he didn't like is no different than what Obama said about the Supreme Court decision he didn't like. Both chastised them about losing the soul of America (one speaking of God & the other about what makes America special). That's my opinion. You are welcome to your own.

[sklanger]

You're the whiny little bitch crying about name calling, not me. Given that you engaged in name-calling yourself, it's not unreasonable for me to be amused by your whining. Selective memory much?

And again: Reagan did not chastise the Court. He didn't even mention them, much less "blast" them. The tone and tenor of Obama's demagoguery was unprecedented. He directly called out the Supreme Court -- something Reagan didn't do.

Maybe you should get your facts straight before hyperventilating.

[voyeurdug]

Idiot "pep rally" point... good come back... how do you comparatively rate one of one?

[LordWolven]

80% Where the hell did he get that statistic from? According to Gallup a majority of Americans agree with the Court and not Obama.

[loon0493]

@LordWolven to let corporations donate umlimitlessly to political parties, yet the average working American is totally for that.

[LordWolven]

It's not just corporations though, unions like SEIU and interest groups like the Sierra Club and the NRA will be able to donate.

The average company is looking to make a profit, not really influence an election. Because of this they are not going to use their ability to lobby like they can. Read what the ACLU stated about the case or watch Liberalviewer's video on the case. It's nowhere near as bad as Olberman makes it out to be.

[cagedtigersteve]

google is your friend.

[cagedtigersteve]

Oh wait I'm sorry. Gallup did the poll.

[fret2424]

John Paul Stevens, the only republican appointed justice to vote against this travesty, wrote a 90 page brief on how this would hurt our country.

He predicted that the ruling would:

"cripple the ability of ordinary citizens, Congress and the states to adopt even limited measures to protect against corporate domination of the electoral process."

John Paul Stevens was appointed in 1975 by Ford (R)!

Obama agreed with him, and so do I!

Who said being a justice was going to flowers and sunsets?

[FeelFreeToArgue]

@fret: Exactly. My feeling about some justices getting their feelings hurt is who the fuck cares. Members of the court have absolute job security. I think being able to put up with some criticism when NONE OF IT CAN ACTUALLY EVER TOUCH YOU falls comfortably within the realm of minimum expectations.

Get it out of this specific circumstance and frame it more generally: Should a president who feels the court has handed down a toxic judgment not use his bully pulpit to decry it? Really?

[sidplicity]

I can't wait till next presidential election. For all those sucking the tete of the activist right wing court let's see what happens. For fucksakes we have a political movement right now (teabag) which is bankrolled solely by corporations. If you think your vote counts, if you truly believe that wait and see. Oh and hope your already in top 1 percent or have the fortune of having a last name already involved in Washington inner circle. Niave. Whoo a fine example.

[whoo689]

The Supreme Court was uncomfortable because a) Obama and the Dems deliberately distorted and lied about the decision and b) they added new shit that's not even related to the case! The court case had NOTHING to do with campaign contributions! it was about political ads or films close to election day.

[fret2424]

"cripple the ability of ordinary citizens, Congress and the states to adopt even limited measures to protect against corporate domination of the electoral process."

-Justice John Paul Stevens

Appointed in 1975 by Ford (R)!

[TrollBuster9090]

By today's Republican standards, Gerald Ford was a communist, and by definition so are all of his Supreme Court appointments.

[scbluesman13]

@TrollBuster9090

By today's republican standards, Ronald Reagan would have been a liberal democrat.

[brabon1]

nixon would be liberal dem too

[ETericET]

@brabon1 Most don'y know that. Cons memory is very short.

[whoo689]

States of the union are a waste of time, if you ask me. Same old shit every year. For the time that's wasted, the president could just as easily write down on a piece of paper his proposals and bills and send it to Congress and then have an oval office speech on live tv the next day or two to talk about his proposals for a little bit. Cut out all the bullshit.

[whoo689]

The SOTU is meaningless. It's just a president giving his laundry list of future big-gov't proposals to Congress on TV. When's the last time you actually heard a president wanting to CUT a useless big agency or department?? If anything, it's just incremental small bullshit that EVERYONE agrees should be cut b/c it's obvious, like earmarks. But nothing like eliminating the DOE has been proposed in a while in SOTU, if ever.

[facelesshorseman]

Just as the "States Rights" Southerners benefited from the most sweeping Federal intrusion into them at the time with the Dred Scott decision, today's "No activist Judges" Dixiecrats, erm, Republicans, go blind at their own hypocrisy.

...Am I surprised? You gotta be kidding.

[NoCensorshipYT]

MORE government NEVER makes people MORE FREE.

[NoCensorshipYT]

GIbbs just kinda said that the March 18th deadline Obama set most likely not be met.

HOOORAY!

[MooseOfReason]

They were invited guests and weren't allowed to express themselves. Obama was condescending to them to their face, to a standing ovation by his own party.

Why shouldn't they have been uncomfortable?

[NoCensorshipYT]

@MooseOfReason

Exactly,

It made Obama look bad, VERY bad.

Leave's a bad taste in your mouth when our LEGISLATIVE branch is directly attacked in front of the American people

[JBeatty17]

Hey dummy, you do realize that the Supreme Court is part of the JUDICIAL branch, right? The legislative branch would be Congress. Guess that's what happens when you drop out of high school! LOL.

[NoCensorshipYT]

@JBeatty17

SO what?

What I said is TRUE.

Hey, what do you want, I went to LIBERALLY controlled public schools!

[NoCensorshipYT]

Gibbs tells fibbs.

[FixedNewsChannel]

I don't mean to be disrespectful, but Roberts is a plain asshole who said his outlook on the law was to "not think beginning with an all-encompassing approach to constitutional interpretation is the best way to faithfully construe the document."

In other words, screw constitutional rights as they are written, I'll interpret them any damn way I please.

The only reason Roberts was pissed is that someone actually called out these characters for their flaws. Didn't like it one bit, did he?

[kaysandesses]

I find it rather ironic that the Chief Justice of SCOTUS is making a blatantly political statement bashing the President for being political. In doing so, Roberts has thrown his hat into the political ring which is completely outside the scope of his job. I think if Roberts had cast his vote with a clear conscience then he wouldn't feel the need to defend his actions. "me thinks he dost protest too much..."

[NoCensorshipYT]

@kaysandesses

If that's your argument, than why not?

[kaysandesses]

@NoCensorshipYT Your post makes no sense.

[Boogathegreat]

the supreme court decision was retarded

[budkin]

John Roberts is a joke of a Supreme Court Justice. A corporation is a person? FAIL.

[TrollBuster9090]

Yeah, that was a full circle fail moment for the Supreme Court.

From

Dred Scott: A person can be somebody's property.

To

Citizens United: Somebody's property can be a person.

Add to that a few other clusterf++ks, like interfering with an election recount in Florida, and Scalia going duck hunting with Cheney WHILE he was adjudicating Cheney's case, and the activist five appear to be doing their best to destroy the credibility of the Supreme Court.

[sklanger]

You're an imbecile. Citizens United does not hold that "property can be a person."

Blame Congress if you like. See 1 U.S.C. 1: "the words 'person' and 'whoever' include corporations, companies, associations, firms, partnerships, societies, and joint stock companies, as well as individuals."

And no, Scalia wasn't adjudicating "Cheney's" case any more than cases nominally involving agency or department heads "ABC v. Gates," "XYZ v. Rumsfeld," are "their" cases.

Get real.

[TrollBuster9090]

You're pretty funny. :)

[agitcam]

America has the best Supreme Court that corporate amerika can buy and the Court just proved the point. Like the leadership of both political parties the Supreme Court is ruled not by law and logic but by their Kapitalist pay masters.

[boots920]

The supreme court ruled in favor of the US government in 1939. (The people take it up the yang everytime).

Gold Certificates issued against the sheople's gold that was confiscated in 1933 were no honored.

The Supreme Court , you can trust them about as far as you can throw them. They're in bed with the corrupt government.

[btc8128]

gold lost value

[boots920]

How so government employee ?

1776 $20 in paper per oz stable until Nixon the asshole ended sound money.

2010 $1100 unstable because the Federal Reserve note is being counterfeited.

How else could the American hamsters pay for their sandbox wars.

[btc8128]

Thanks, I love our government.

80% of gold goes to make jewelry and its value is driven by speculation. As oil goes up gold goes down, I hope you bought a lot of it. This is an economic reality. The time to get into gold was 5 or 6 years ago. Its running its cyclical course. By spring 2013 gold will be at it natural resting price (between $400 & $600 an oz) just like it did in 1981. Which is more important to our everyday economy gold or oil? You heard it here first. Youre welcome.

[boots920]

Here's the problem dip shit if the US dollar was real money

$20 US in paper would buy 1oz of gold. The assholes have been counterfeiting money since 1971.

You heard it first from Nixon the asshole's mouth first.

"Crime of the Century" 1971 - end of sound money.

[btc8128]

Call me whatever you want. It wont change the truth, everything I said was true and thats why you ignored it.

The New Hampshire agreement of 1944 says different.

First greenback issued 1862 and the average household income was $32 per year.The middle class was 2.8% of the U.S. population.

Gold closed January 4, 1971, the first business day of that year, at $ 37.440US.

1980 gold value $594, then all time high.

1984 gold value $309.

You dont know what youre talking about.

[boots920]

Call me whatever you want. It wont change the truth,

Exactly asshole gold is only worth $20 US but wait why is it trading at $1100 US and unstable.

Central Bank is counterfeiting paper money that's why.

Gold has maintained its value for 6,000 years the US dollar should be its equivalent because its world reserve.

You might as well use the Zimbabwe dollar for world reserve.

[btc8128]

you're wrong

[btc8128]

Silly, do you really think 3% of the worlds population really controls the value of gold. Especially when the bulk supply of it has always been outside of its borders? The value of U.S. currency has always had more to do with debt, exchange rates, and trade imbalances than gold.

[boots920]

Silly, do you really think 3% of the worlds population really controls the value of gold.

No way if the US dollar was real money $20 would buy 1 oz.

How else do you think the asshole US government pays for the sandbox wars ? On the back of the world.

[btc8128]

your wrong

[btc8128]

You're wrong.

You lowered yourself to attacks on me because you cant face the facts. Gold has been dropping in value for almost 3 weeks now, Gold is volatile, currencies require stability.

[boots920]

"Gold has been dropping in value for almost 3 weeks now, "

The only thing the fuckers can't adjust is the price of gold if $20 US bought 1 oz of gold I would have nothing to prove my point.

[btc8128]

You stated in"1776 $20 PAPER could buy an OZ of gold". The U.S. didnt even have paper until 1862. But we had the British Pound in 1776. You dont know what youre talking about.

[btc8128]

you're wrong

[boots920]

"you're wrong"

Well how much does it cost to buy 1 stinking oz of pretty metal.

In 1776 $20

IN 2010 $1100 the market never lies, the US government does though, fuckin counterfeiters.

[btc8128]

As oil goes up gold goes down. Oil will draw investment capital, golds value will drop. $400 to $600 by 2013.

[btc8128]

the average household income was $32 per year.The middle class was 2.8% of the U.S. population.

Almost no one had gold

[boots920]

"Almost no one had gold"

Bingo , bravo asshole the gold price is just a measurement of value.

You don't have to own it to know the US dollar won't hold value against gold.

If you invest in gold at least you'll be able to eat down the road. (Trade for some spuds mang).

My friend who lived through a war said people with gold got to eat, people without died.

[btc8128]

At one point in 1983 gold was $187 an oz. Thats over a 60% drop in value in just 4 years. Its a good thing our dollar wasnt pegged to it. It would have destroyed our economy.

[boots920]

At one point for almost 200 years gold only went up $15.

It does that in a day now.(unstable) I know gold is pretty but its really not worth more than $20 US. Unless the central bank is counterfeiting paper currency then you get the debacle you have now. People are allowed to save money in paper or gold at this point. I choose physical gold, the sheople are welcome to save in paper. They won't run out of ass wipe that way.

1776 $20 US

1971 $35 (15 bucks in almost 200 years.)

[joshpnw]

Gibbs is nothing but a symptom.

This entire admin is a disease.

Obama has cheapened the office he holds.

He's a condescending *sshole... period.

He is way too much of a coward to have a public discussion/debate with Justice Roberts... he'd rather hurl insults from his high position where he can't be challenged.

Roberts would hand Obama an intellectual *ss whooping if they had a face to face open debate.

[NoCensorshipYT]

@joshpnw

Did you just HEAR?

It just keeps getting worse and worse with these polluted people.

The House just voted to investigate Hoyer and Pelosi about Massa!

Almost a unanimous vote.

I say GIVE IT UP already, party of the ASS!

[joshpnw]

I was reading about the investigation, but didn't see anything about Pelosi, Hoyer... where did you get that info?

[NoCensorshipYT]

@joshpnw

Just saw the video about this from FoxNews on YouTube.

Meghan Kelly from Fox reported it.

Only 1 person voted against it and 15 or so voted PRESENT.

[btc8128]

youre funny

[NoCensorshipYT]

@btc8128

Honestly who wants a bunch of ASSES running our Healthcare!

[btc8128]

I do, i love what Dems are doing. I wish obstructing republicans would stop playing baby games with our country, they spent 10 years destroying it. It may take a decade to repair their damage. I am absolutely baffled as to why anyone with a brain would support republicans. Theyre incompetent and they dont serve their constituents best interests. Just look at Bunning for god sake. Republicans are pure bullshit. Theyre disgusting, grotesque, and bigoted people.Brainwashed Kool-Aid drinkers

[NoCensorshipYT]

@btc8128

OK Karl Marx, whatever you say.

[btc8128]

More of the same old repulsive vomit from another right wing robot. Call me whatever you want. It wont change the truth, everything I said was true and thats why you didnt address it. You lowered yourself to an attack on me because you cant face the fact that republicans havent had a positive impact on this country in nearly 100 years (Teddy Roosevelt). So you can add coward to the last statement as well.

[NoCensorshipYT]

@btc8128

Coward are people who feel the STATE should runs their lives, that GOVERNMENT is more important than the will of the people.

Pure and Simple.

[quinnmcguee]

"who feel the STATE should runs their lives"

That's a misrepresentation. No one "feels the state should RUN their lives" but there are things that are better left to government and others that are better left to the free markets. For example, building codes. I'd rather have the government, which has no financial stake, regulating the safety of building than a capitalist who might make more money by cutting costs. Same goes for food safety, and yes, healthcare.

[btc8128]

JOKE, tell me that as you drive down government funded roads, drinking government cleaned water, fly in federally protected skys or on federally built rail systems. So then you dont need police or firepersons? What about the state colleges and universities you couldnt get into? 350 of the 500 best colleges in the world are here and federally funded. Say whatever you want about USPS but you can ship a box much cheaper with them than Fedex & UPS. You use the government systems every day fool

[knowledge198405]

very well put....people are just selfish and ignorant on the subject

[boots920]

Government starting false flag wars to scare the crap out of the taxpayers.

Since 1913 all wars have been for paper profit, nothing else.

The government just uses the same formula and then uses effective propaganda to get the hamsters to fight each other.

False Flag + Propaganda = Paper profit wars this time looks like they took out the entire planet's money system.

Believe me there is no future...

[btc8128]

Will of the people my ass. The vast majority of people want healthcare reform. Your argument is bigoted.

[TrollBuster9090]

Hahah!

I love this.

The activist conservative judges on the Supreme Court decide to go against precedent and rule that it's okay for corporations to BUY American elections. It was a horrible decision, and the vast majority of Americans think it was a horrible decision.

But because Obama spoke out against it, and because Obama haters HAVE to do the exact opposite of everything Obama does, they're all lining up in support of it.

Keep it up, guys, you're doing a great job! :)

[LordWolven]

@TrollBuster9090

Actually, Gallup did a survey and found that the majority of Americans agree with the Supreme Court and members from both the Democrats and Republicans agree rather than just one party.

So no, it is not just Obama Haters who support the ruling.

[TrollBuster9090]

Depends on the question asked. Gallup (Jan 22) showed 57% agreed campaign donations were a form of free speech (an element of the ruling), but 55% believed there should be restrictions on the amount corporations and unions can donate to campaigns.

Then the WaPo-ABC poll of Feb. 17 showed that 80% disagreed (65% strongly) with the SCOTUS ruling allowing unlimited campaign donations by corporations and unions. So there's support for some of the principles of the ruling, but not the ruling.

[sklanger]

The ruling did not invalidate campaign donation caps. Only limits on independent expenditures (as opposed to direct contributions to candidates).

Your polls do not show "no support" for the ruling, which you mischaracterize.

[TrollBuster9090]

Hahah!

No, indeed, "my" polls showed 20% support for the ruling. If conservatives, Republicans, a few libertarians, and various other Obama haters want to keep on aligning themselves with that 20%, by all means be my guest.

[sklanger]

Your polls showed 20% support for what you think is the ruling.

Given that the ruling wasn't what you think it was, that 20% figure wasn't supportive or non-supportive of anything put out by the Court.

You don't even know what the case was about. Give it up.

[Richardgwm]

That was the worst decision since Dred Scott.

[NoCensorshipYT]

Gibbs you ignorant DOUCHEBAG.

Now that the SURPREMES know what to expect from Obama, which is NO respect, then GUESS WHAT??

They ain't going to be there next time, except for Sotomayer and Ginsberg.

I can't say I blame them!

[joshpnw]

Well said.

[integral]

@NoCensorshipYT oh stop whining

[NoCensorshipYT]

@integral

whining?

I would say Obama has THAT market cornered.

LOL!

[joshpnw]

Yep... if he isn't whining about a Supreme court decision... he's whining about Bush.

Hope & Change (TM) Bullsh*t!

[NoCensorshipYT]

@joshpnw

Obama was whining just today that he thinks he's talked ENOUGH already on Healthcare.

THIS IS JUST DAWNING ON HIM???

LMAO!

[btc8128]

youre funny