Baraq’s First SOTU: Seriously Flawed at Best

Well, Baraq Hussein’s first State of the Union is wrapped up and in the can for what it’s worth.  (Not much, IMHO.)

Firstly, Herr Doktor Professor Baraq Hussein would have gotten a serious downgrade in MY class for screwing up a fundamental reference, that one could venture to say is symptomatic of a deep lack of respect for the fundamental principles of the founding of the American Republic:

“We find unity in our incredible diversity, drawing on the promise enshrined in our Constitution, the notion that we’re all created equal…”

First off, downgrading what is the one of the fundamentally unique principles of our Republic to a mere “notion”…words fail. Also…checking my trusty pocket reference copy of the Constitution and Declaraction of Independence indicates that said reference is NOT “enshrined in our Constitution”…but IS found in the Declaration, in close and immediate context of “…they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights…”

Key concept there: Our equality, and our “unalienable rights” are NOT granted by any act of man, even the Constitution! They are directly bestowed as a part of the “Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God”. Once that relationship is disestablished nothing is left except ultimately as Mao stated and one of B.O.’s appointed “czars” (and how American is THAT title!?) reiterated “Political power comes out of the barrel of a gun”, or the other one who stated that if they couldn’t prevail “by means of the power of persuasion, then they would use the persuasion of power.”

Otherwise, some additional highlights of the less-than-edifying experience:

FACT CHECK: Obama and a toothless commission

There were also OTHER notable instances of B.O. playing fast and loose with reality:

President Barack Obama told Americans the bipartisan deficit commission he will appoint won’t just be “one of those Washington gimmicks.” Left unspoken in that assurance was the fact that the commission won’t have any teeth.

Obama confronted some tough realities in his State of the Union speech Wednesday night, chief among them that Americans are continuing to lose their health insurance as Congress struggles to pass an overhaul.

Yet some of his ideas for moving ahead skirted the complex political circumstances standing in his way.

Go to the original piece for all the gory details…it’s a reminder of the old Warren Zevon lyric: “It ain’t that pretty at all!”

Another historic aspect of the SOTU is the dissing of the Supremes, and for that matter of Congress at the same time. The congressional part of this is here:

…the cost of Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security will continue to skyrocket. That’s why I’ve called for a bipartisan fiscal commission, modeled on a proposal by Republican Judd Gregg and Democrat Kent Conrad. (Applause.) This can’t be one of those Washington gimmicks that lets us pretend we solved a problem. The commission will have to provide a specific set of solutions by a certain deadline.
Now, yesterday, the Senate blocked a bill that would have created this commission. So I’ll issue an executive order that will allow us to go forward…[emphasis added]

Without getting into the argument about this idea for a budgetary fig-leaf, the stated relationship here can be summarized as “I don’t need no steenking Congress, I’ll just do what I want by proclamation regardless of the vote of the people’s representatives.”

As far as the Supremes go, they were verbally flogged in an unprecedented display of inter-branch criticism reminiscent of some of the worst of FDR, but PERHAPS not as egregious as Jackson’s refusal to abide by the Marshall court’s decision on the Cherokee removal.

At least Justice Alito wasn’t buying B.O.’s mis-statements:
Justice Alito mouths ‘not true’

POLITICO’s Kasie Hunt, who was in the House chamber, reports that Justice Samuel Alito mouthed the words “not true” when President Barack Obama criticized the Supreme Court’s campaign finance decision.

“Last week, the Supreme Court reversed a century of law to open the floodgates for special interests — including foreign corporations — to spend without limit in our elections,” Obama said. “Well I don’t think American elections should be bankrolled by America’s most powerful interests, or worse, by foreign entities. They should be decided by the American people, and that’s why I’m urging Democrats and Republicans to pass a bill that helps to right this wrong.”

So what was wrong? Approx. a century ago corporations were banned from making direct contributions to candidates for election funds. This was not addressed, nor affected by the current ruling. Also, foreign corporations are STILL banned from involvement in U.S. political campaigns (although admittedly the presence of Chinese money in Bubba Clinton’s and B.O.’s fundraising was noteworthy as cases of sometimes intercepted interventions.)
Result? Read on:
Supreme Court Historian: After President’s “Insult,” Won’t Be Surprised If Supreme Court Doesn’t Attend Next Year’s State of the Union Address

A noted Supreme Court historian who “enthusiastically” voted for President Obama in November 2008 today called President Obama’s criticism of the Supreme Court in his State of the Union address last night “really unusual” and said he wouldn’t be surprised if no Supreme Court Justices attend the speech next year.

“It was really unusual in my mind to see the president going after the Supreme Court in such a forum,” said author and Law Professor Lucas Powe, the Anne Green Regents Chair in Law, and a Professor of Government at the University of Texas-Austin School of Law. “I’m willing to bet a lot of money there will be no Supreme Court justice at the next State of the Union speech.”

Added Professor Powe, who clerked for Supreme Court Justice William Douglas, “you don’t go to be insulted. I can’t see the Justices wanting to be there and be insulted by the president.”

But this is just a negative reaction from a myrmidon of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy, right?…er…not this time:

His opinion has nothing to do with animus towards the President, for whom Powe said he voted enthusiastically.

Chief’s overall grading: D-minus for content.

I won’t even approach what I actually thought of the delivery except to ask if you can pronounce a-r-r-o-g-a-n-t. ’nuff said.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>