BO’s treatment of the SCOTUS was classless, but not unexpected. I’m glad Alito was there with his Joe Wilson impression.

Don’t forget Obama is called a great Constitutional Scholar but there is no record of anything he has ever written on the Constitution.

Yet, this presidential genius has the nads to criticize a well-respected SCOTUS member who has a wealth of work.

No wonder Obama’s approval numbers are plummeting. All flash no substance.

Look for most of the Democrats to desert this pretender in the next few months, as the mid-term elections get closer.

“BO’s treatment of the SCOTUS was classless, but not unexpected.”

Many President’s have pubilcally disagreed with Supreme Court decisions. Most notably Reagan and both Bush’s were outspoken critics of the Roe vs. Wade decision as is their right.

“Don’t forget Obama is called a great Constitutional Scholar but there is no record of anything he has ever written on the Constitution.”

No, he was a Constitutional Law Professor at the University of Chicago Law.

No wonder Obama’s approval numbers are plummeting.

Actually in the two most recent polls his approval ratings have increased.
http://www.pollingreport.com/obama_job.htm

Although I have generally considered (now) Chief Justice Roberts to be more of a judicial activist than I prefer, I supported his confirmation and, until his comments, respect and admired him. His comments, however, do not befit his station, and he has sullied the office by getting down and dirty in the political mire. I am not only surprised, but terribly disappointed. My fear is we may have ended up with a real hack here.

For what it’s worth, I think President ought not have made his remark during the SOU, either.

I do agree with the discussion of the propriety of the justices even being at the SOU, or the SOU as it has become, however. I don’t think I have heard an SOU address that was worth the time invested since Johnson and Nixon.

After the Court appointed W president in 2000, Justice O’Connor spoke about how surprised she was that the American people seemed to have so little respect for the Court now. Roberts has further eroded that respect.

President Obama’s “comments, however, do not befit his station, and he has sullied the office by getting down and dirty in the political mire. I am not only surprised, but terribly disappointed. My fear is we may have ended up with a real hack here.”

I agree.

Look for most of the Democrats to desert this pretender in the next few months, as the mid-term elections get closer.

—

I have no doubt you are correct. Just as you were correct about Hillary getting the nomination in a slam dunk …. About the Super Delegates getting together to make sure Obama didn’t get the nomination …. About disaffected Hillary voters deserting the party in droves …. About Palin making huge in-roads among Democratic women …. About McCain carrying Pennsylvania and Michigan and winning all of the W states, coasting to a huge electoral victory …. About no Supreme Court Justice agreeing to swear in President Obama …. About Don O. Fritos getting an injunction prohibiting the swearing in …. About Orly Taitz, Extension School Attorney, Dentist, Real Estate Agent and Wig Model winning a lawsuit forcing President Obama out of office. Yes, your record is superb. I am certain you are correct, as long as your tin foil hat doesn’t blow off again.

… getting down and dirty in the political mire.

—

The President is a political figure. The Chief Justice is not. Do you understand?

James, you’re living in lala land.

http://hotair.com/archives/2010/03/10/obama-approval-rating-at-43-rasmussen/

I know, you will say Rasmussen report it totaly biased, but you might remember that his polls have been the most accurate in predicting elections because he polls actual voters.

“The President is a political figure. The Chief Justice is not. Do you understand?”

Then why was the President running his fat mouth about the Supreme Court at the most political event of the year?

I know, you will say Rasmussen report it totaly biased, but you might remember that his polls have been the most accurate in predicting elections because he polls actual voters.

—

Actually, Michelle, Rasmussen was not the most accurate in 2008. That honor goes to FiveThirtyEight. Right on the button. And, Rasmussen can’t be polling actual voters right now, since there is no election pending.

“And, Rasmussen can’t be polling actual voters right now, since there is no election pending.”

I thought the election in November was “pending”, but hey, what do I know? Oh and uh, JamesA1102, your reference to a poll also means nothing. See Royal A’s comment.

James, you’re living in lala land.

No, I’m lookling at the most recent polls from both AP and Ipsos/McClatchy in which the President’s approval rating is at 53%
http://www.pollingreport.com/obama_job.htm

If you don’t mind JamesA, I’ll go with Gallup:

3/7-9/10
Approve– 48 Disapprove– 44

The point of contention is when the President stated that now foreign corporations would be allowed to donate to campaigns and influence elections. Nope, never were, and are not able to now. So as he was dressing down SOTUS he was patently incorrect, leading to that dire head-shake that rocked the free world. Thus everyone is upset with the decorum of the Court while the President was completely misrepresenting their decision on the biggest political stage.

If Obama hadn’t ‘dressed down’ the SCOTUS with a charge that was proven to be factually incorrect, and in a hostile environment with a bunch of ‘pom-pom waving cheerleaders,’ this whole thing wouldn’t have even happened. I know Obama feels quite ‘Papal’ when speaking from his pulpit, but he picked the wrong venue to do it. In a Pennsylvania hall packed with applause-laden union hacks, sure. But not in the State of the Union Speech.

The point of contention is when the President stated that now foreign corporations would be allowed to donate to campaigns and influence elections.

They can contribute indirectly. If a foreign corporation buys a US company or already has a US subsidiary the foreign corporation can contribute via that US subsidiary.

It could be worse. We could be in France:

Rumours that French President Nicolas Sarkozy and his wife Carla Bruni-Sarkozy are both having affairs are gaining momentum in France.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/7406909/Nicolas-Sarkozy-and-Carla-Bruni-both-having-affairs.html

If you don’t mind JamesA, I’ll go with Gallup

Go right ahead. Since September the Presdent’s approval ratings have hovered in the high 40%/low 50% range. So they are fairly stable and not plumeting as was originally stated.

Actually I won’t care about Pres. Obama’s poll ratings until 2012.

For me right now, the only purpose his favorable/unfavorable ratings serve is as an indication of how much support he can generate for Democratic candidates in the fall who are facing difficult elections. So far when he’s campaigned (VA, NJ, MA) he hasn’t helped much. Apparently that is also true in Nevada, but it’s too early to make a prediction there. Plus, it looks like the Democrats will try to steal that election by funding a faux Tea Party candidate.

It’s really quite funny. Roberts said nothing wrong, and Alito did nothing wrong. Merely an honest assessment of what happens when you have a group of petulant teenagers in charge of a freaking nation.

I’m surprised Alito didn’t react more considering considering the leader of the free world was talking out of his ass.

This will go down as one of the most horribly inept, over-reaching and arrogant administrations ever.

James, there is a great blog today on how scewed that AP poll was on Hot Air. You should check it out.

King, You are correct, I meant to say likely voters.

Judge Andrew Napolitano critcizing Chief Justice John Roberts is like having a second leuitenant critiquing General Patton’s battle plan. He may have a good idea, but he simply does not have the background or the experience to be relied upon. Napolitano is simply not in the same league as John Roberts. Napolitano’s claim that the Chief Justice acted improperly in commenting on whether the Supreme Court should attend State of the Union is laughable. The only public controversy here is whether the Court should attend a political meeting that has denegrated to an unabashed political rally. There is nothing public here to influence other than the Court’s collective decision whether or not to attend a meeting.

The tragedy here is that Fox News weakest analyst is this judge who I suspect is not highly regarded among the Fox anchors who are also lawyers. Where is the counter-balance to Judge Napolitano’s apparent ramblings.

James,
You could also look at real clear politics, which does a running average of all polls. Today it’s 48.6% approve, 46.1 disapprove.

It could be worse. We could be in France:

—

You can’t imagine how often I say that. A light croissant with tart apricot preserves, strong coffee and a delicate pear. Crispy baguettes and cheese which brings tears to your eyes. Long dinners with wondrous sauces on delectable meats and fantastic wines. Svelte women in haute couture, smelling like a Spring morning. TV5. Jazz. Watching the sunrise over Montmarte, arm and arm with the woman you love. Watching the sunset looking out from the Cap d’Antibes towards Cannes, arm-in-arm with the woman you love. And, single payer health care, the finest in the world. How I loathe Frabce.

Roberts did not criticize the president, but only expressing how uncomfortable he was being surrounded by loud, boisterous, and hyper-partisan congress-critters.

So I think Judge Napolitano was wrong to criticize Roberts for something he did not do.

And, single payer health care, the finest in the world

You had me til there, King.

You could also look at real clear politics, which does a running average of all polls. Today it’s 48.6% approve, 46.1 disapprove.

I just did and the President’s approval rating has been hovering in the high 40s/low 50s for months. So how exactly have his approval ratings plumeted?

Constitutionally, SCOTUS is given the right to be control freaks. Inside their chamber, they are omnipotent as a group and beyond reproach as individuals. They are like the friend who invites you over to dinner and constantlyl reminds you “it’s my house”. In this case, they were in the president’s house…at his state of the union speech–and it was their duty to maintain their decorum.

James,
If you look at the real clear politics break-down, the only one the uses likely voters is Rasmussen and his spread is 43% approve, 56% disagree. I guess we’ll see which poll was correct on election day. Last election day, Rasmussen was. Although king did point out another poll that was correct.

James,
Try out this link from Gallup (not exactly known for leaning right):

http://www.gallup.com/poll/113980/Gallup-Daily-Obama-Job-Approval.aspx

If you can’t understand the graphic, let me know. I’d be happy to explain the line that shows BO’s approval going nothing but down.

And Barry,
I think Alito had a perfect right to do what he did when the president lied. He knew no one in the media would bother to fact check it, so it was the only time for the truth to get out.

some people Say what they Mean – NOT pc (PC is my computer) – we NEED more of this!

If you can’t understand the graphic, let me know. I’d be happy to explain the line that shows BO’s approval going nothing but down.

I saw it and it shows that it has been hovering in the same range for a few months, not plumeting.

If you look at the real clear politics break-down, the only one the uses likely voters

But the original comment wasn’t that is approval rating was plumeting among “likely voters” just that it was plumeting, so it is too late to add qualifiers now.