Political Ruminations

Morning Quote: Antonin Scalia

On Fox News Sunday Chris Wallace asked conservative Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia if he interprets the Second Amendment as allowing for any limitations on the right to keep and bear arms. Think Progress:

Scalia admitted there could be, such as “frighting” (carrying a big ax just to scare people), but they would still have to be determined with an 18th-Century perspective in mind.

Wallace then asked Scalia “What about… a weapon that can fire a hundred shots in a minute?”, resulting in the following response from Scalia (which basically amounts to Scalia suggesting that such weapons as rocket launchers would be allowed according to his very literal interpretation of the Constitution.):

“ We’ll see. Obviously the Amendment does not apply to arms that cannot be hand-carried — it’s to keep and “bear,” so it doesn’t apply to cannons — but I suppose here are hand-held rocket launchers that can bring down airplanes, that will have to be decided. ”

Morning Quote: Charles Lane

Washington Post Columnist Charles Lane on Chief Justice John Roberts’ opinion in the Supreme Court decision on the Affordable Care Act:

“ What he has done in his brilliant opinion is to sacrifice a pawn, called the individual mandate and put the entire Great Society in check. And he has done that by getting two liberal justices to agree with him in a seven to two ruling that there are serious limitations on the federal government's ability to use its spending power to get the states to cooperate in welfare and education programs, which is really how everything works, or a lot of things work including education, Medicaid, etc.

And he has done that and gotten liberals to applaud him for it, so that now, next term when Voting Rights Act Section 5 and affirmative action in colleges come up before the court as they're going to and he votes with the other four conservatives to strike them down, all those liberals who might otherwise complain will now have to acknowledge that this fair-minded statesman, John Roberts, was involved in that decision.

This is a man of great brilliance and all those conservatives who are griping about this ruling need to give it a second thought.”

Hahaha……I don’t think so.

Rand Paul is a Buffoon

Sen. Stupid err….Rand Paul (R-Ky), doesn’t think that the opinion of the Supreme Court makes something constitutional….or not:

“Just because a couple people on the Supreme Court declare something to be ‘constitutional’ does not make it so. The whole thing remains unconstitutional. While the court may have erroneously come to the conclusion that the law is allowable, it certainly does nothing to make this mandate or government takeover of our health care right.”

Interesting. Then perhaps we should revisit Bush v. Gore. Or Citizens United. Oh that it were so….

As Ashby notes, the Supreme Court is indeed the ultimate authority on the constitutionality or lack thereof, of a thing:

Actually, that’s exactly what it means. For all intents and purposes, when the Supreme Court declares something constitutional, it will remain as such until the Supreme Court declares otherwise or the constitution is amended.

Morning Quote: Supreme Court

From the opinion of the Supreme Court in the section on the mandate [of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA)], the Court has upheld the mandate as a tax:

“Our precedent demonstrates that Congress had the power to impose the exaction in Section 5000A under the taxing power, and that Section 5000A need not be read to do more than impose a tax. This is sufficient to sustain it. ”

Morning Quote: James Fallows

Writer James Fallows believes that the conservative members of the Supreme Court are engaged in “a kind of long-term coup”:

“[....]When you look at the sequence from Bush v. Gore, through Citizens United, to what seems to be coming on the health-care front; and you combine it with ongoing efforts in Florida and elsewhere to prevent voting from presumably Democratic blocs; and add that to the simply unprecedented abuse of the filibuster in the years since the Democrats won control of the Senate and then took the White House, you have what we'd identify as a kind of long-term coup if we saw it happening anywhere else.**

Liberal democracies like ours depend on rules but also on norms -- on the assumption that you'll go so far, but no further, to advance your political ends. The norms imply some loyalty to the system as a whole that outweighs your immediate partisan interest. Not red states, nor blue states, but the United States of America. It was out of loyalty to the system that Al Gore stepped aside after Bush v. Gore. Norms have given the Supreme Court its unquestioned legitimacy. The Roberts majority is barreling ahead without regard for the norms, and it is taking the court's legitimacy with it. ”

Over the past few years, that thought has occurred to me more than once. Nothing Republicans do would surprise me anymore.

Via Peter Schorsch

Morning Quote: John McCain

On ‘Meet the Press’ yesterday, John McCain on how Citizens United, the worst SCOTUS ruling of the century, has affected our political system:

“The whole system is broken and it's a wash.”

 

The understatement of the year.

SB1070 Supporters Shout Out Their Hate Outside Supreme Court

SB1070 supporters, by their very nature, are despicable human beings. And now we know they aren’t afraid to be counted and recognized. Think Progress:

WASHINGTON, DC — As the Supreme Court heard oral arguments Wednesday on the constitutionality of Arizona’s “papers, please!” immigration law, supporters rallied outside with hate-filled jabs at Latinos and immigrants in general.

Though outnumbered by opponents of SB 1070 at least 20-to-1, supporters made up for their timid numbers with unabashed hate and racism. Among the things SB 1070 proponents said that were overheard by ThinkProgress:

• “Go back to your third-world armpit if you don’t like it!”
• SB 1070 supporter, pointing to SB 1070 opponents, many of whom are Latino: “We can read, unlike some of the people over there”
• Select lyrics from a song called “God Save Arizona” that compared Attorney General Eric Holder to Japanese bombers at Pearl Harbor: “On a clear Sunday morning 1941…they sank the Arizona in a cloud of fire and smoke…And years later in 2010, Arizona is a target once again…Attacked by drug lords, terrorists, and our own Attorney General”
• A button that read, “Don’t Blame me… I voted for the American.”
• “Mexico doesn’t even want them.”
• SB 1070 supporter to a nearby opponent: “Why don’t you put that sign in Spanish?”
• SB 1070 supporter, pointing to SB 1070 opponents, many of whom are Latino: “Those people over there are trespassing!”
• “Obama can’t even come up with a decent birth certificate.”

Sen. Jeff Sessions is a Racist, Misogynist Pig

And Senator Sessions (R-Al)has an unreasonable dislike of Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan. Think Progress, emphasis mine:

Jefferson Beauregard Sessions knows something about what it means to be unfit for the federal bench. In 1986, the Senate Judiciary Committee rejected Session’s nomination to a federal judgeship in Alabama after a Justice Department attorney revealed that Sessions called the NAACP and the ACLU “un-American” and “Communist-inspired.” Unfortunately, rather than gaining some humility from this incident, the now-Sen. Sessions seems to be finding questionably qualified nominees under every rock he can lift:

Sessions was one of [Justice Elena] Kagan’s toughest critics on the Senate Judiciary Committee when she was nominated by President Obama in 2010. Last week, he revived his complaints about her when he became one of only two committee members to vote against Maine lawyer William J. Kayatta Jr., whom Obama nominated to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit.

Kayatta’s transgression, according to Sessions, is that he was the lead investigator for the American Bar Association panel that gave nominee Kagan its highest rating — “Unanimous Well-Qualified.”

Given that Kagan had never been a judge and had little experience in private practice, Sessions said, such a rating “was not only unsupported by the record but, in my opinion, the product of political bias.”

The fact that Justice Kagan is imminently well qualified for her position is not too difficult for doubters to ascertain, since her employment history is a matter of public record, as Think Progress points out:

For the record, Justice Kagan was the sitting Solicitor General, a former Dean of the Harvard Law School, a former White House attorney and senior policy staffer and a former law clerk to Justice Thurgood Marshall when she was nominated to the Supreme Court. The idea that she wasn’t well qualified for her current job is absurd.

These thuggish effing Republicans make me sick.

President Obama Speaks to the Supreme Court on Judicial Activism

Yesterday, at a news conference with the leaders of Canada and Mexico, President Obama expressed confidence that the Supreme Court will uphold the healthcare law:

“Ultimately, I am confident that the Supreme Court will not take what would be an unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress.”

In addition, President Obama pointed out that in accordance with precedent, the ACA mandate is constitutional.

The president then issued what some may consider a warning (and damn it, good for him, because the Conservative members of the Court obviously need to be reminded of what their job actually is!) to the Court (or a forerunner of a major campaign talking point if SCOTUS overturns the ACA):

“And I'd just remind conservative commentators that, for years, what we have heard is, the biggest problem on the bench was judicial activism, or a lack of judicial restraint, that an unelected group of people would somehow overturn a duly constituted and passed law.

Well, this is a good example, and I'm pretty confident that this court will recognize that and not take that step.”

And, with predictable timing, the right wing has now begun making these comments into a BFD, as in, you know, “How dare this [black man] president challenge our Supreme Court? They are non-partisan. Even if the five Conservative members of the court consistently rule in accordance with GOP wishes. So what? Obama and the left must be stopped!”

Robert Parry on the Conservative justices, in an enlightening article on “a judicial war on democracy”:

These five Republican justices – John Roberts, Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, Anthony Kennedy and Samuel Alito – appear poised to effectively rewrite the Constitution’s Commerce Clause in order to justify thwarting the judgment of elected officials who enacted the Affordable Care Act in 2010.

If the GOP Five continue on this presumed course toward striking down “Obamacare,” it also would become the latest front in what looks to be a right-wing judicial war on democracy – with the Supreme Court’s Republicans serving not as fair-minded arbiters of the Constitution but as a black-robed rear-guard of an ideological army.

This brouhaha just began, and my educated guess is that it will continue to grow. It may even become a central tenet of the Obama re-election campaign; after all, this court has made three very partisan decisions in recent years, beginning with Bush v. Gore in 2000. And this, they are charged by our Constitution, not to do.

Republican Hypocrites and Judicial Activism

Even though it is well known and understood by all and sundry who pay attention to politics that should the Supreme Court strike down the Affordable Care Act, they would be ignoring, blatantly ignoring, the Constitution, and almost 200 years of precedent.

Let’s be clear here--that act alone would make these right wing justices activist judges if they weren’t already activist judges given their Citizens United ruling in 2010, and for some, the Bush v. Gore ruling in 2000.

The thing is, on the one hand, Republicans are begging them to strike it down, and on the other, they have the utter gall, the hypocrisy, to decry activist judges in their very next breath. In fact, judicial activism is one of their very favorite talking points when attacking liberal justices.

Examples of Republican hypocrites whining about judicial activism:

REP. STEVE KING (R-IA): “If we’re going to respect judge-made law and stop praying in our public schools, that was the beginning of the judicial activism that’s begun to break down this civilization, and this culture.”

SEN. JOHN CORNYN (R-TX): “Unelected and serving with lifetime tenure, and substituting their view for the views of the people’s…the people and their elected representatives. That’s not the way our democracy is supposed to work.”

SEN. CHUCK GRASSLEY (R-IA): “Judges are not policymakers. That’s what we are in the Congress of the United States. Judges are called on to decide the facts and to apply the law.”

Watch the hypocrites at work:

We must hold them accountable.

Via Think Progress

Morning Quote: Sen. John McCain

Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), predicts “huge” campaign finance scandals due to the brazenly bad Citizen’s United ruling by the Supreme Court in 2010:

“I promise you, there will be huge scandals, because there's too much money washing around, too much of it we don't know who's behind it and too much corruption associated with that kind of money. There will be major scandals.”

McCain also said that it’s unlikely that the 112th Congress will pass a law to “rewind” the Supreme Court's ruling:

“A majority of Republicans would vote against it because Republicans are profiting by it" in the battle for the party's presidential nomination,and a lot of Democrats don't want to take it up.

But we will go out there again and we'll fight again and we'll continue to fight because this system is not fair to the American people.”

Quote of the Day

Ron Paul (R-KY) on the upcoming ruling by the Supreme Court on Obamacare, aka the Affordable Care Act:

“I suspect they're going to rule it constitutional, but that is a big guess out of thin air.”

I suspect he’s right.

Earlier this morning, the Supreme Court began listening to arguments on the healthcare law. A ruling is expected sometime in June.

Chart of the Day

Not that long ago, if you had a decent job, you could be pretty sure that it offered healthcare coverage, and that it would not be completely unaffordable.

This is no longer the case, as Paul Krugman pointed out last week. A new study shows a remarkable decline in employment-based healthcare coverage, depicted in the chart below.

Krugman’s conclusion:

What this says is that the system that has provided workable insurance coverage to many (but not enough) Americans is coming apart at the seams. And this in turn means that if health reform goes down, we’re going to be looking at a wave of misery spreading across the land.

SCOTUS begins their debate on the Affordable Care Act tomorrow.

Morning Quote: Justice Antonin Scalia

“Get over it. It was a long time ago, people forget. It was a 7-2 decision. It wasn’t even close.”

- Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia on the 2000 Bush v. Gore decision. The decision was 5-4, not 7-2, and you, as part of a partisan, Republican majority, assisted George W. Bush in stealing a presidential election.  Just sayin’....

Bob Cesca reaction:

The decision was 5-4. And no sir, we won’t “get over it” because it irrevocably changed the course of history — on top of being a crime against citizen suffrage.

Via Bob Cesca

President Obama on the 39-year Anniversary of the Roe v. Wade Decision

In a statement he wrote yesterday, the 39-year anniversary of the Supreme Court ruling on Roe v. Wade, President Obama defended the landmark decision:

“We must remember that this Supreme Court decision not only protects a woman’s health and reproductive freedom, but also affirms a broader principle: that government should not intrude on private family matters. I remain committed to protecting a woman’s right to choose and this fundamental constitutional right.  While this is a sensitive and often divisive issue- no matter what our views, we must stay united in our determination to prevent unintended pregnancies, support pregnant woman and mothers, reduce the need for abortion, encourage healthy relationships, and promote adoption.  And as we remember this historic anniversary, we must also continue our efforts to ensure that our daughters have the same rights, freedoms, and opportunities as our sons to fulfill their dreams.”

Morning Quote: John McCain

“I predict to you that there will be huge scandals associated with this huge flood of money.”

- Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), commenting on the ruling by the Supreme Court in 2010(Citizens United) that allowed the introduction of Super PACs into our politics.

Morning Quote

Former Senate Majority Leader, Bill Frist (R-NV), on the future of the Affordable Care Act:

The health care reform law will survive even if the Supreme Court declares the individual mandate unconstitutional, former Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist said Wednesday in Sioux Falls.

“It's going to survive. It's not going to be repealed.”

Via Taegan Goddard

Cartoonish U.S. Supreme Court

The week’s cartoons mocking our corporate-bought SCOTUS’ Walmart ruling.

Cartoonist – John Darkow

Cartoonist – Pat Bagley

Cartoonist – R.J. Matson

John Dean: Rehnquist and Mitchell Forced Justice Fortis to Resign

Olbermann discusses the Walmart ruling and the resignation of Justice Fortis with former White House Counsel under Nixon, John Dean,  on Countdown last night:

---

RELATED POSTS:
~ Maddow Video: Is Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas Poised for Impeachment or Resignation?

Maddow Video: Is Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas Poised for Impeachment or Resignation?

Supreme Court Justices are not legally required to follow the federal code of conduct for the judiciary, but they are supposed to do so.

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas is embroiled in an ethics scandal because he has not followed those guidelines, nor precedent in his jurisprudence. Watch:

For your edification, the NYT piece on Crow-Thomas.

Related Posts on Political Ruminations: John Dean: Rehnquist and Mitchell Forced Justice Fortis to Resign

---

VIDEO TRANSCRIPT (courtesy of The Maddow Show):

MADDOW:  When you are a Supreme Court justice, people tend to name things after you, even build places just to honor you.

This statue, for instance, honors Justice William Brennan in his native Newark, New Jersey.  Consider also the Thurgood Marshall School of Law in Houston.  The Sandra Day O‘Connor College of Law in Arizona.  Brandeis University in Massachusetts named for Louis Brandeis.

SCOTUS Rules Against Innocent Man in Wrongful Conviction Lawsuit

Yesterday, Antonin Scalia evidently caused a 4-car accident on his way to court, possibly salivating, in his frenzy to dismiss, and/or mock the female plaintiffs in the Wal-Mart v. Dukes case on the days docket.

(I should add that Scalia was only fined $70, which does not begin to compare to what my son was recently fined ($500) when he was ticketed for being 5 miles over the speed limit, and a registration that was a day late in being re-upped--but that's another story of inequity in the case of the People v. the Elites)

But the mocking of people with lady parts was possibly minor when you consider the ruling of our right-wing Supreme Court in the case of Connick v. John Thompson, wherein, the Court ruled against John Thompson, and thus ensured that there would be no repercussions when prosecutors withhold evidence, and innocent people go to jail, and in Thompson's case, to death row for 14 long years. No damages were allowed Mr. Thompson, and simple human decency was notably absent.

A bitterly divided Supreme Court on Tuesday tossed out a jury verdict won by a New Orleans man who spent 14 years on death row and came within weeks of execution because prosecutors had hidden a blood test and other evidence that would have proven his innocence.

The 5-4 decision delivered by Justice Clarence Thomas shielded the New Orleans district attorney's office from being held liable for the mistakes of its prosecutors. The evidence of their misconduct did not prove "deliberate indifference" on the part of then-Dist. Atty. Harry Connick Sr., Thomas said.

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg emphasized her disapproval by reading her dissent in the courtroom, saying the court was shielding a city and its prosecutors from "flagrant" misconduct that nearly cost an innocent man his life.
"John Thompson spent 14 years isolated on death row before the truth came to light," she said. He was innocent of the crimes that sent him to prison and prosecutors had "dishonored" their obligation to present the true facts to the jury, she said.

In the past, the high court has absolved trial prosecutors from any and all liability for the cases they bring to court. The key issue in the case of Connick vs. John Thompson was whether the district attorney could be held liable for a pattern of wrongdoing in his office and for his failure to see to it that his prosecutors followed the law.

Also...too....apparently, DAs may now be held innocent regarding any wrongdoing in their offices, and prosecutors need no longer follow the law.

H/T Kevin Drum and MrBrink

Adding………Irrelevant but of interest; the district attorney in the case, Harry Connick Sr. is the father of singer, Harry Connick Jr..

Morning Quote: Anthony Weiner

Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-NY) talking to a TPM reporter (after an address at the Center for American Progress) on what may happen re the Affordability Care Act if any of the current lawsuits end up in our corporatist, predominantly right-wing, Supreme Court:

The Supreme Court unfortunately is a corporate-dominated arm of the Republican Party right now. I put nothing past them. But they would have to take a Bush v. Gore like leap to strike down the constitutionality of the whole law. Even the mandate is a pretty thin reed.

I second the bolded sentiments. Nothing.

Morning Quote: Clarence Thomas

In a 2009 speech to students at an event celebrating the Bill of Rights, Justice Clarence Thomas on his memories of his childhood schoolroom:

Or how can you not reminisce about a childhood where you began each day with the Pledge of Allegiance as little kids lined up in the schoolyard and then marched in two by two with a flag and a crucifix in each classroom?

Yeah, I can see where he might miss the days when religion played an even larger role in public schools. The idea that we are guaranteed freedom of religion, and that religious symbols and celebrations should not be a part of public institutions, apparently doesn’t sit well with him, and yet, this is a Supreme Court Justice. Oh, the irony.

Morning Quote: Clarence Thomas

In a 2009 speech to students at an event celebrating the Bill of Rights, Clarence Thomas spoke lyrically about an appliance, the dishwasher:

I have to admit that I’m one of those people that still thinks the dishwasher is a miracle. What a device! And I have to admit that because I think that way, I like to load it. I like to look in and see how the dishes were magically cleaned.

This sort of anti-intellectualism from a member of the Supreme Court is just …. astonishing.

Morning Quote: Clarence Thomas

In 2009,  Justice Clarence Thomas, gave a speech to students at an event celebrating the Bill of Rights. According to The New York Times, Thomas did not exactly “embrace” that document:

Today there is much focus on our rights. Indeed, I think there is a proliferation of rights. I am often surprised by the virtual nobility that seems to be accorded those with grievances. Shouldn’t there at least be equal time for our Bill of Obligations and our Bill of Responsibilities?

It seems that many have come to think that each of us is owed prosperity and a certain standard of living. They’re owed air-conditioning, cars, telephones, televisions.

Thomas went on to say that the aforementioned air-conditioning, cars, telephones, televisions, are luxuries. 

Morning Quote: Rachel Maddow

Rachel Maddow on the Wisconsin protests

If you break the public unions in Wisconsin you can break them everywhere.

And as Maddow points out in the video, the Democratic Party can not survive with out the unions. (thank you again, SCOTUS, for the Citizens United ruling).

Quote of the Day re Clarence Thomas and the Citizens United Ruling

It turns out that Clarence Thomas should have recused himself from the Citizens United case because it now appears that the corporatist right wing supreme court justice was a shill for Citizens United, a right wing organization. Bob Cesca:

So Citizens United runs a favorable ad for Thomas. Then Thomas decides in favor of Citizens United. This decision has to be vacated. It's obvious -- now more than than ever -- that Thomas shouldn't have been allowed to plunk himself anywhere near the Citizens United case. Ads, Koch Brothers money, spousal associations. This is more egregiously wrong than just about any Supreme Court decision in a long, long time -- even worse than Bush v Gore.

Impeachment, and VACATE the damn decision! both get my vote.

More from Karoli, at Crooks and Liars

Updating Daily Political News Brief

What we're reading today:

Good news for the Affordable Care Act came in the form of a Mississippi judge’s dismissal of a lawsuit.

Egyptian government officials have joined the protests in Cairo, as the cries for Mubarak’s resignation grow louder.

Gov. Jan Brewer [R-AZ] struck out at Mayor Bloomberg [I-NYC] over the Arizona gun sales sting conducted by his administration.

President Obama will take questions from reporters today at a press conference regarding the crisis in #Egypt. There is chatter on the Hill that he is talking to Egyptian officials regarding a plan for Mubarak to resign immediately. UPDATE: the Obama administration is now in talks with Egyptian officials, and has said that the U.S, wants Mubarak to resign immediately.

What happened to the Republican chatter about shutting down the federal government?

We know that thanks to the rulings of activist judges in the matter of the Affordable Care Act, the case will very probably go to the Supreme Court sooner rather than later. Looking forward, Sen. Orrin Hatch [R-UT] is calling for Justice Elena Kagan to recuse herself from the consideration of the case, because she is partisan. Using that criteria, of course we should also excuse Alito, Thomas, Roberts, Scalia, and Kennedy. Ridiculous. H/T Ashby

The government has agreed to grant full collective bargaining rights to 40,000 airport screeners. Stay tuned for the massive Republican meltdown! H/T Ashby

Are the decisions Clarence Thomas made serving on the Supreme Court making his wife rich?

A Republican wants to raise taxes? Sen. Saxby Chambliss [R-GA] believes a tax increase is essential for deficit reduction.

No, President Obama did not order blackouts.

Former Justices Stevens and O’Connor on the Citizens United Ruling

We knew that Justice Stevens held a poor opinion of the ruling as he was one of those who dissented. Justice O’Connor, however, was retired at the time of the ruling, and it appears now that she also has concerns about the ruling. And well she should. From a Newsweek interview:

O'Connor: I suppose the court has had occasion to change its view on certain issues over a period of years. Do you see any on the horizon that you think the court might well reexamine as things go on?

Stevens: Well, you know, Sandra, I dissented in a lot of cases, and I'd like [the court] to reexamine them all [laughs]. I don't expect them to, but I think they made a serious mistake in the [Citizens United] campaign-finance case, in which they overruled the portion of an opinion you and I jointly authored [on the McCain-Feingold campaign-finance law]. And I think you might share my view.

O'Connor: I notice that myself, and when I am asked about it, I often say, "Well, the court overruled part of what I wrote." And leave it there. It is a source of concern today, the extent of campaign contributions and whether corporations and unions must be held to the [same] standard as an individual. These are tough issues for the nation and the court.

According to a report by the office of New York City Public Advocate, Bill de Blasio, groups that protect the identity of their donors, and/or are allow to spend unlimited amounts, spent $132.5 million to influence the vote during the 2010 election cycle, which amounts to approximately a third of the spending by all outside groups on the midterms, or 15% of all federal election spending in 2010.

Morning Quote: Thomas Jefferson on the Intended Role of the Judiciary

In a letter to Monsieur A. Coray, Oct 31, 1823, Thomas Jefferson indicated his awareness that the Founding Fathers had erred when they deemed that Supreme Court Justices serve for life. He was right. of course.

At the establishment of our constitutions, the judiciary bodies were supposed to be the most helpless and harmless members of the government. Experience, however, soon showed in what way they were to become the most dangerous; that the insufficiency of the means provided for their removal gave them a freehold and irresponsibility in office; that their decisions, seeming to concern individual suitors only, pass silent and unheeded by the public at large; that these decisions, nevertheless, become law by precedent, sapping, by little and little, the foundations of the constitution, and working its change by construction, before any one has perceived that that invisible and helpless worm has been busily employed in consuming its substance. In truth, man is not made to be trusted for life, if secured against all liability to account.

VIDEO: Anderson Cooper Takes Down Nutjob Birther, Leo Berman

On the heels of the Supreme Court’s refusal to hear the latest Birther case, Anderson Cooper makes an effort to get through to this man nutjob, Leo Berman, a Republican member of the Texas House of Representatives. Berman is among those Birther conspiracy nuts who simply refuse to accept President Obama as the legal president.

Washington (CNN) -- The Supreme Court has again cast aside an appeal that raised doubts about President Barack Obama's U.S. citizenship, a grass-roots legal issue that has gained little legal or political footing, but continues to persist in the courts.

The justices without comment Monday rejected a challenge from Charles Kerchner Jr., a Pennsylvania man who sought a trial in federal court forcing the president to produce documents regarding his birth and citizenship.

Obama produced a copy of his birth certificate when he was running for president in 2008, and the Supreme Court has refused to hear any of the Birther cases referred to it thus far. It is truly time to give it up, nutjobs. 

Morning Quote: Frank Rich on Tom DeLay Conviction and Wall Street

Oddly enough, the crime for which Tom DeLay was finally convicted last week, money laundering and conspiracy to launder money, well, that’s no longer a crime thanks to the SCOTUS ruling on Citizens United. Frank Rich on NYT:

It’s an industry that can buy politicians as easily as it does dwarfs, which is why government has tilted the playing field ever more in its direction for three decades. Now corporations of all kinds can buy more of Washington than before, thanks to the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision and to the rise of outside “nonprofit groups” that can legally front for those who prefer to donate anonymously. The money laundering at the base of Tom DeLay’s conviction by a Texas jury last week — his circumventing of the state’s post-Gilded Age law forbidding corporate campaign contributions directly to candidates — is now easily and legally doable at the national level.

VIDEO: Who is Secretly Buying Our Elections?

Chilling. And as someone else said [can't remember exactly who], this election is for all of the marbles. VOTE.

 

8 False Tea Party-Republican Memes to Talk About Before You Go to the Polls

1. The Tea Party is a grass roots movement.

REALITY: The Tea Party is a rebranding effort by the Republican Party, led by the billionaire Koch Brothers and their organization, Americans for Prosperity. Read this report, and don't forget to look at this fabulous graphic, which is worth at least 10,000 words all by itself. The corporate takeover of our government is in process.

2. The stimulus was a failure.

REALITY: Not only was it not a failure, but a huge number of Republicans not only had their hands out to grab the money while the "failure" word came flying out of their mouths at regular intervals, 114 of them took credit for the same stimulus that they voted against. Additionally, the stimulus cost $787 billion, not $1.2 trillion, and created 3.3 million new jobs, and prevented an even deeper recession.

3. The President is a Muslim Kenyan Socialist who has never produced his birth certificate.

REALITY: The President is an American Christian centrist who produced his birth certificate for public display when this ridiculous meme first began during the 2008 election. Socialism requires a more left wing point of view, and this president is not even center left, much less far left.

4. Nowhere in the constitution does it state that there must be a separation between church and state.

REALITY: It is important to understand that this meme was not born out of ignorance, but out of a desire to intertwine religion and government, and thus the Far Right has re-interpreted the first two clauses in the First Amendment to be more to their liking. Constitutional scholars agree that these clauses denote the doctrine of the separation of church and state. Because our SCOTUS is Far Right, it is a dangerous meme.

5. The health care reform bill enacted by Democrats hurt Medicare and recipients of Medicare.

REALITY: Not only did it not harm the Medicare program, it actually strengthened it.

6. There is no difference between union funding of election ads and funding by secretive Super PACs.

REALITY: The difference between them is enormous. Union funding comes from the workers, the people who belong to the unions, and thus we know who is funding these ads. Secretive Super PACs, on the other hand, are funded by anyone, including in some cases foreign interests or multi-national companies, and no disclosure is required. There is also NO limit on donor contributions. Individuals funding union pacs are limited to specific, and low, dollar amounts, and there is disclosure.

These last two are from Dave Johnson, in his words.

7. Social Security is a Ponzi scheme, and is "going broke".

REALITY: Social Security has run a surplus since it began, has a trust fund in the trillions, is completely sound for at least 25 more years and cannot legally borrow so cannot contribute to the deficit (compare that to the military budget!) Life expectancy is only longer because fewer babies die; people who reach 65 live about the same number of years as they used to.

8. President Obama tripled the deficit.
REALITY: Bush's last budget had a $1.416 trillion deficit. Obama's first budget reduced that to $1.29 trillion.

Please re-blog this post, email it, and link to it. This stuff matters.

Links to Obama Administration / Democratic Party Accomplishments:

~ Rachel Maddow recounts what the Democrats accomplished in the past two years, and in the face of unrelenting opposition from the Republican Party. Maddow says that the Democrats, who controlled both Housees and the Presidency, were about policy, not politics.

~ Crowd-sourced on Twitter, a well sourced listing of the achievements of the Obama administration.

~ WTF has Obama done so far?.com

And finally, go VOTE!

Citizens United Ruling Driving Creation of Super PACS to Fund 2010 Campaign Spending

Thanks to our right wing SCOTUS, the defenders of the plutocracy, we, the American people, are getting royally screwed, and it's only going to get worse. Bloomberg:

At least 25 “super PACS,” including one linked to Karl Rove, are fueling a surge in money for this year’s elections following the U.S. Supreme Court ruling that struck down limits on corporate campaign spending.

These political action committees can take unlimited company, union and individual donations and explicitly urge voters to support or oppose candidates, unlike ordinary PACs and nonprofit groups. Like other PACs, they must register with the Federal Election Commission and disclose donors.

“They can say whatever they want politically in the advertising,” said Michael Toner, a former FEC chairman who’s among the lawyers dubbing them super PACs. “It’s very liberating.”

American Crossroads, a group advised by Rove, a top adviser to former President George W. Bush, said it has raised more than $17 million. That includes $1 million from Dixie Rice Agricultural Corp., a company led by Harold Simmons, also the chairman of Dallas-based Titanium Metals Corp. A trust controlled by Jerrold Perenchio, former chairman of New York- based Univision Communications Inc., also gave $1 million.

That may be just the beginning. American Crossroads also has an issue-advocacy group that doesn’t have to disclose donors, and it won’t say how much of the $52 million it plans to raise in this campaign will go toward that effort. Other groups aren’t even registering as PACs and will be able to spend millions on ads without disclosing their contributors as long as they steer clear of expressly advocating for or against a candidate.

I am going to repeat this daily until after the midterms.

Democrats must go to the polls and VOTE. There is no reasonable excuse to stay home this time.

Fox News’ Military Analyst Lt. General Tom McInerney Revealed as a Birther

Retired Lieutenant General Tom McInerney, Fox "News" military analyst, revealed himself as a Birther, when he made a signed affidavit in support of Lt. Col. Terry Lakin.

Lakin, the [moron] Birther who refused deployment to Afghanistan because of his belief that President Obama is ineligible to serve as the President despite all evidence to the contrary, and despite the fact that other cases of military personnel refusing orders on the same basis, i.e., questioning Obama's eligibility to serve as commander-in-chief, have been dismissed.

McInerney's affidavit:

For the foregoing reasons, it is my opinion that LTC Lakin's request for discovery relating to the President's birth record in Hawaii is absolutely essential to determining not merely his guilt or innocence but to reassuring all military personnel once and for all for this President whether his service as Commander in Chief is Constitutionally proper. He is the one single person in the Chain of Command that the Constitution demands proof of natural born citizenship. This determination is fundamental to our Republic, where civilian control over the military is the rule. According to the Constitution, the Commander is Chief must now, in the face of serious -- and widely-held -- concerns that he is ineligible, either voluntarily establish his eligibility by authorizing release of his birth records or this court must authorize their discovery. The invasion of his privacy is utterly trivial compared to the issues at stake here. Our military MUST have confidence their Commander in Chief lawfully holds his office and absent which confidence grievous consequences may ensue.

One has to wonder if the Birther morons such as Lakin and McInerney had any issue with a president who wasn’t elected but was appointed by a 5-4 Supreme Court decision  who ordered his country to invade, and occupy another country for years based on lies and a poorly constructed neocon fantasy.

Anderson Cooper shines the light on Terry Lakin's claims.

NBC News on the Lakin case:

U.S. military officials tell NBC News that the U.S. Army will court martial a lieutenant colonel who refuses to deploy to Afghanistan because he considers orders from President Obama to be “illegal.”

Army doctor Lt. Col. Terry Lakin believes Obama does not meet the constitutional requirements to be president and commander-in-chief, because he believes (incorrectly) that Obama wasn’t born in the United States.

Lakin refused this week to report to Fort Campbell, KY for deployment to Afghanistan, but instead showed up at the Pentagon, where he was confronted by his brigade Commander Col. Gordon Roberts, a Vietnam Medal of Honor recipient.

Lakin was informed by Roberts that he would face court martial, and his Pentagon building pass and government laptop computer were seized.

Via News Hounds

A Victory for Equality in California

In a tremendous victory for equality this afternoon, Proposition 8 was struck down by a California judge, who called it “unconstitutional”. 

Ultimately, the judge concluded that Proposition 8 "fails to advance any rational basis in singling out gay men and lesbians for denial of a marriage license. Indeed, the evidence shows Proposition 8 does nothing more than enshrine in the California Constitution the notion that opposite-sex couples are superior to same-sex couples. … Because Proposition 8 prevents California from fulfilling its constitutional obligation to provide marriages on an equal basis, the court concludes that Proposition 8 is unconstitutional.”]

This case will likely end up in front of our dear, dear SCOTUS, and while the Roberts Court is not known for it’s tolerance. I’m going to remain optimistic for my friends in the LGBT community. FTW!

Coal Industry Seeks to Buy Candidates Favorable to Their Interests

Thanks to the Citizens United Ruling in January, corporations are now deemed people, and thus have been given unprecedented rights to invest in political candidates.

The coal industry, including Massey Energy, is joining together to form a 527 group in order to throw their money at candidates they hope will defeat [anti-coal] Democrats in key midterm elections. Think Progress reports:

The Lexington Herald-Leader in Kentucky reports that several coal executives, including Blankenship, are pooling their money to take advantage of the Supreme Court’s Citizen United decision loosening corporate campaign finance laws by forming a 527 group to help elect coal-friendly Republicans. Why a 527? Because according to the IRS, they can hide their activities until “next year, long after the Nov. 2 election.” From the report:

“With the recent Supreme Court ruling, we are in a position to be able to take corporate positions that were not previously available in allowing our voices to be heard,” wrote Roger Nicholson, senior vice president and general counsel at International Coal Group of Scott Depot, W.Va., in an undated letter he sent to other coal companies. [...]

“A number of coal industry representatives recently have been considering developing a 527 entity with the purpose of attempting to defeat anti-coal incumbents in select races, as well as elect pro-coal candidates running for certain open seats,” Nicholson wrote. “We’re requesting your consideration as to whether your company would be willing to meet to discuss a significant commitment to such an effort.”

Nicholson listed three races “of interest”: Conway against Republican Rand Paul for Kentucky’s open Senate seat; Chandler against Republican Garland “Andy” Barr in Kentucky’s 6th Congressional District; and Democratic U.S. Rep. Nick Rahall against Republican Elliott “Spike” Maynard in West Virginia’s 3rd Congressional District.

Thanks, SCOTUS.

Jon Kyl denies that the Roberts Court is on the side of Big Business

Wah, wah, wah...... Sen. Kyl is complaining that the Democrats are fraudulently painting the Roberts Supreme Court as very pro-big business. "Fraudulently" is the wrong word to use, as this court has repeatedly proven their allegiance to the big corporate powers via their rulings, and their unprecedented jucicial activism. This hard right court has ruled for Big Business in every ruling that matters. To hell with we, the "little" people.

Kyl on Hugh Hewitt's radio show, discussing the confirmation hearings for Elena Kagan:

HEWITT: With Chief Justice Roberts, was any review of those documents held by a — for example, the senior minority member of the Judiciary Committee?

KYL: No. No, not to my knowledge, no. 

HEWITT: How did the first day go?

KYL: Pretty much as expected. Republicans raised appropriate questions. It was respectful. She noted that all of her meetings with Senators have been courteous. Democrats primarily not only applauded her for having a wonderful background and being a great person, but also took the opportunity to slam what they call the Roberts Court and its activism in coming down on the side of big business repeatedly at the expense of the little guy. All a fraudulent claim, but that’s what they’re arguing.

Think Progress:

The Roberts court has been one of the most pro-corporate in history. A recent study from the Constitutional Accountability Center documented how the court “has a decidedly probusiness tilt.” Demonstrating this bent, the court last week strengthened corporations’ power to force their customers and employees into biased, privatized courts whenever a dispute arises between them.

And, the court’s far-right voting bloc famously upended precedent to defend corporations’ supposed right to spend unlimited sums on elections in Citizens United. Today, in a piece on Roberts’ dramatic impact on the court, the New York Times said that decision “showed great solicitude to the interests of corporations.”

MMFA addresses myths re Elena Kagan

Media Matters clears up myths about Elena Kagan, with a current count of thirty-eight. They’re updating the article as new myths come to light.

Myth: Kagan banned military recruiters from Harvard

Myth: Kagan is "anti-military"

Myth: Kagan is "radical"

Myth: Kagan's praise for an Israeli Supreme Court justice shows she's a radical (NEW)

Myth: Kagan's thesis shows she's a socialist  […..]