Laurence Tribe: Liar
Laurence Tribe takes spinning so far, it’s fair to call it rank dishonesty:
There has never been any doubt that President Obama fully accepts the Supreme Court’s authority to render a definitive ruling on the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act.
. . . .
The “unprecedented, extraordinary” step he noted the justices would be taking if they were to overturn the Affordable Care Act was, of course, not the step of exercising judicial review, as the court has done ever since Marbury v. Madison in 1803, but the step of second-guessing congressional judgments about how best to regulate a vast segment of the national economy.
That is a lie and Laurence Tribe is a liar. Here’s what Obama actually said:
Ultimately, I’m 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.
I have now watched Jeff Toobin on CNN, Eric Holder in a letter to the Fifth Circuit, and now Laurence Tribe all pretend Obama said something other than what he actually said. Perhaps this makes sense if your world view privileges subjective and secret intentions over the plain meanings of words — and if you were inclined to give Obama the benefit of the doubt, which I doubt any conservative does. After all, Obama did later issue a “clarification” which was fairly different from what he initially said.
But in my world view, words mean things. And what Obama said is clear. And I’m getting more than a little sick and tired of people pretending he said something other than he said.
If someone wants to admit he screwed up in his initial statement, and argue that his clarification was the accurate statement, great. But instead they’re pretending that he never suggested his law was beyond judicial review. Our lapdogs in the media need to stop treating this like a “he said she said” issue and call him on it.
Why are you lying to the public, Laurence Tribe?
First!
Patterico (f598ef) — 4/7/2012 @ 2:40 pmisn’t “Affordable Care Act” another lie?
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 4/7/2012 @ 2:43 pmNever have so many worked so hard to cover up so much screw-up by just one silly non-serious man who will prolly eventually throw them all under the bus, too. It’s sad, but hey, it’s Toobin and Tribe and Holder and Carney all of whom we already had pegged as being lying liars.
elissa (65d3dc) — 4/7/2012 @ 2:50 pmLaurance Tribe is the smartest idiot I have ever read. He would make Mensa in Idiocracy. He has electrolytes!
dfbaskwill (c021f2) — 4/7/2012 @ 2:50 pmThat Tribe piece was such an embarrassment. I blushed for him.
The panicked apology reminded me of a pathetic wife excusing a miscreant husband, or protective mother of her narcissistic idiot son.
The more expressively he talks of Obama’s honor the faster we should count the national spoons.
Sarahw (b0e533) — 4/7/2012 @ 2:57 pmthe Tribalism
Colonel Haiku (997307) — 4/7/2012 @ 2:57 pmof the lying Fugahwi
where the fug ah we?
So if it is so important that a section of our economy be regulated properly by Congress to the point that religious freedom can be restricted, does that make the Dred Scott decision correct, as slavery was an important section of our pre-Civil War economy? I hazard a guess that Mr. Tribe and Obama would not extend the ‘logic’ behind supporting Obamacare to slavery.
Tom Seaver (127b41) — 4/7/2012 @ 3:05 pmAs a brilliant constitutional lawyer deeply devoted to the rule of law, he has nothing but respect for the critical function that judicial review performs in preserving the American system of constitutional government
This statement lacks any support, and is a bald faced lie.
JD (34d969) — 4/7/2012 @ 3:11 pmIf Obama was so down with the process of judicial review, why did he feel it necessary to add the bit about the judges being a bunch of unelected bozos to his comments?
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 4/7/2012 @ 3:12 pmUltimately, I’m 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.
Tribe, Toobin, Carnie, etal simply insert their more convenient narrative in place of the grossly ignorant words of the brilliant constitutional scholar.
JD (34d969) — 4/7/2012 @ 3:14 pmoh. Here you go. This is what it looks like when a brilliant constitutional lawyer is deeply devoted to the rule of law:
Mr. Tribe just forgot the link.
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 4/7/2012 @ 3:18 pmI need Mr steve’s substance approval before I comment any further.
JD (34d969) — 4/7/2012 @ 3:20 pmthat never seems to deter this Obama fellow
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 4/7/2012 @ 3:23 pmOh, JD I think you should just go ahead without Steve’s oversight and approval. You can always apologize later if he disapproves of what you said.
elissa (65d3dc) — 4/7/2012 @ 3:25 pmI think Jay Carney lied about this also.
They think we are dumb. To that I will have to quote Dustin and say “Arble Garble Marble Barble”!
Noodles (3681c4) — 4/7/2012 @ 3:33 pmI will denounce and condemn myself, pre-emptively. Republicans are liars too. Insert appeal to mushy middle here. Now Steve should be happy.
Tribe and Hoolder have a near total disrespect for their audience’s ability to understand the English language.
JD (34d969) — 4/7/2012 @ 3:35 pmhttp://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/1989/10/11/09090010.h09.html?tkn=XWRF8niwOWGw4obxfUh%2BbU%2FGen8JNEFTdfh%2B
Patterico, Tribe fought against a preschool of liitle black children being set up in his neighborhood. He is a NIMBY liberal, disgusting.
[note: fished from spam filter. –Stashiu]
tessa (1cd4c2) — 4/7/2012 @ 3:48 pmTribe is a high profile Harvard Law Professor who mentored Obama when he was a student there. When the student goes onto make public statements about the law that make any practicing attorney laugh out loud, he has to change the subject somehow. If you can’t fire Cruise Missiles at an Aspirin Factory in the Sudan, this is pretty much all you’ve got.
I saw another funny comment on this on “The Five” on FNS. Its funny that Obama is using these focus-group tested words like “unelected” to describe the Supreme Court… after he appointed two of the nine Justices.
Kaisersoze (298188) — 4/7/2012 @ 3:57 pmJD,
Machinist (b6f7da) — 4/7/2012 @ 3:57 pmIn truth, they’ve gotten away with it for years.
isn’t “Affordable Care Act” another lie
Affordable to whom?
Kevin M (bf8ad7) — 4/7/2012 @ 4:02 pmWhen Dick Durbin can get away with saying that tornadoes are caused by people not buying hybrids, mere BS like this can slide by. Oh, wait, Durbin’s comments probably slid by, too. I forgot — only Republicans lie or say stupid stuff. Democrats just get misquoted.
Kevin M (bf8ad7) — 4/7/2012 @ 4:05 pmSince when does lying mean much when you’re a lying ass liberal? The obama anal suppository media does not care about any truths. Like his boss, Holder and Carney are horse’s asses. I just wonder how much Willard will treat Obama with kid gloves in the mode of dipwad McCain.
Being a liberal lying piece of spit doesn’t seem to have harmed Hillary one bit. Yes, I know Whitewater is ancient history, as are stealing things from White House when the Clintons moved or having no memory of so many actions in the white house. Let’s not forget being fired upon while flying into Bosnia. And yet Hillary has very favorable ratings. Obama himself is always deemed as being so likeable, but exactly why? Always comes across as an arrogant, simple-minded narcissistic jackass to people I know who don’t want to dangle like dingleberries from his anus.
Calypso Louis Farrakhan (d32e4c) — 4/7/2012 @ 4:18 pmI suggest the wildly talented and popular Keith Olbermann play an important role in the election campaign. Ditto for Mikey Moore and assorted other liberal buffoons. Which cities will burn the brightest this summer?
It’s a lot easier than explaining, “Obama is an incoherent moron who could not order a Big Mac with fries without a teleprompter”.
nk (52d02a) — 4/7/2012 @ 4:29 pmUh, you’re wrong. The four “conservative” activists on the Court were primarily concerned with re-legislating the ACA than determining its Constutionality. Notice the almost total lack of precedent discussion, notice Scala’s explicit rejection of his own arguments from Raich, notice the putative balls on these 5 tools who would overturn two democratically elected branches on a subject fought over in the 2008 election, which took a year of compromises amongst “stakeholders” and participating legislators to enact over a fit of conservative piqué. These 5 dudes are not rulers, in case you’ve forgotten the last thirty years of lectures on “activism” and “judicial restraint” that you Federalist Society types have been tossing our way. You know, like the President pointed out in his remarks just prior to your panties getting wadded up.
In summary, Pat, you’re wrong
Timb (8f04c0) — 4/7/2012 @ 4:32 pmUm. I believe that this is the classic example of trying to change the subject.
Oh well, carry on. But you must admit, whether you like it or not BHO is funny: he makes me scurry like cockroaches to explain stuff he pulls out of his butt when he is irritable about not getting his way.
You need to not act like the gal who does homework for the quarterback, dude. He isn’t going to date you.
Simon Jester (547399) — 4/7/2012 @ 4:35 pmMr. Tim all the Congress has to do is re-pass it without the unconstitutional parts and then bam! everyone can enjoy obamacare constitutionally, the way nature intended
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 4/7/2012 @ 4:36 pmTimmah is Teh One’s target audience.
JD (34d969) — 4/7/2012 @ 4:54 pm“which took a year of compromises amongst……. participating legislators to enact”
Timb – Missing the point as usual. That year of compromise was to buy off enough Democrat legislators to get the damn thing passed by the slim margins it did, rather than the “strong majority” referenced in Obama’s comments.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 4/7/2012 @ 4:56 pmMr. Feets – Would that be Green ObamaCare, the way nature intended?
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 4/7/2012 @ 4:58 pm25 um, what happens if the House stays in GOP hands? Who will pass Obamacare? Very important to me is what happens if Obama is reelected and manages to appoint more liberal Justices? Can there be any doubt at all that a Supreme court which he controls will rubber stamp any of his measures?
Calypso Louis Farrakhan (d32e4c) — 4/7/2012 @ 4:59 pmYou have a marine being discharged for disrespecting Obama on Facebook. Will the military go along if the chosen one institutes martial law at some point? Will people in red states allow themselves to be disarmed? Will Eric Holder the top dog at justice crack down on “his” people or just overlook them breaking the law? Funny how things were so much worse under Bush with much lower job unemployment numbers. Slightly more than half pay zero income taxes. Nothing is Obama’s fault. Could a Romney, Santorum, Gingrich or Paul make much difference at this point with the huge debt load eventually being the elephant in the room? I guess easiest thing is to just continue printing more greenbacks until we become a banana/Weimar republic.
Supreme Court assessing the constitutionality of a law is EXTREMIST ACTIVISM !!!!!!!!!!!!!! SC creating rights out of penumbras and acting in the role of the legislature is just fine. Not defending a law passed with strong majorities and asking it be overturned is good.
JD (34d969) — 4/7/2012 @ 5:06 pmYou guys and gals wouldn’t oppose this except for Teh One is half black, just like Zimmerman is half racist and half jooooooooo. Mandates were ok 20 years ago. Racists.
JD (34d969) — 4/7/2012 @ 5:10 pmWait a minute. If Zimmerman is a “White Hispanic,” what does that make the President?
Simon Jester (547399) — 4/7/2012 @ 5:13 pmBig Zero sends envoy to Iran to grab at straws…
http://youtu.be/NsFP2CeTsJw
DJ Haiku (997307) — 4/7/2012 @ 5:16 pmIs it so hard for President Obama to admit he misspoke?
Michael Ejercito (64388b) — 4/7/2012 @ 5:20 pmWhile the Dems pursued Obamacare they were simultaneously losing the state house in Virginia, the state house in blue New Jersey and Ted Kennedy’s Senate seat. I’m no political expert but I’m thinking there’s a message in there somewhere. Can you find it timb?
East Bay Jay (19f566) — 4/7/2012 @ 5:25 pmyes, Michael, it is.
Teh Won once shook his own hand to see what all the fuss was about.
Colonel Haiku (997307) — 4/7/2012 @ 5:26 pmTheir words are only used to obscure their deeds.
Amphipolis (e01538) — 4/7/2012 @ 5:30 pmDidn’t Tribe claim Teh Obe obviously misspoke earlier in the week?
JD (34d969) — 4/7/2012 @ 5:31 pm#34: yes, it is. Remember when the MSM tried to get GWB to admit to mistakes, and how everyone made fun of his reluctance to do so?
Not so much for this guy.
OT, good to know that folks spark up some weed at the Washington Post:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/would-two-presidents-be-better-than-one/2012/04/06/gIQA2euK0S_story.html?wprss=rss_opinions
Simon Jester (547399) — 4/7/2012 @ 5:33 pmJD, I think that Tribe didn’t say it quite that way. I think it was more that we didn’t understand the intricate reasoning that appeared to sound like verbiage pulled from his butt, but was in fact Nobel Prize winning logic.
Simon Jester (547399) — 4/7/2012 @ 5:34 pmIf you think this is lying, wait ’til the fall campaign.
Mike K (326cba) — 4/7/2012 @ 5:47 pmthe high tech lying
Colonel Haiku (997307) — 4/7/2012 @ 5:50 pmwill be like nothing you have
ever seen before
I think this is what you lawyers call precedent, as in, as long as liars get away with lying, they will keep lying. The confusing thing is no one can tell anymore who is setting the example and who is following.
I’ve got a question. If the BS continues to pile up around DC through NYC to Boston, will it get so heavy that North America will tilt and sink into the Atlantic Ocean? Someone talked about this once on the floor of Congress.
I suppose some of these folks could have just said, “President Obama is shrewdly emphasizing his opinion of the process for the benefit of the average American who can’t understand constitutional law.” That would almost be truthful, from some points of view.
This is really so sad. Where do people learn to deceive like this? I want to make sure none of my children go there.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 4/7/2012 @ 6:13 pmTribe is a high profile Harvard Law Professor who mentored Obama when he was a student there.
Vested interest there.
Dana (4eca6e) — 4/7/2012 @ 6:15 pmTimb’s comment doesn’t really seem like it’s worth responding to. He didn’t respond to what I actually said in my post, so why should I bother actually responding to him?
Patterico (f598ef) — 4/7/2012 @ 7:05 pmPerhaps Ryan/Jason will swing by and he can converse with Tim. Troll on troll action…
gazzer (8c7878) — 4/7/2012 @ 7:09 pmYes, Patterico. It must be difficult defending that nonsense. The problem with this President, despite all the media nonsense, is that he really doesn’t think before he says things.
But Bush was stupid. Sigh.
The difference is that folks on the Left MUST support whatever he says. Because if they don’t, they have to admit that they were played.
As Glenn Reynolds says: Heeeey, rube!
Which takes us back to Tribe.
Simon Jester (547399) — 4/7/2012 @ 7:13 pmGazzer: Troll on troll action. Um, I need some brain bleach, please.
Simon Jester (547399) — 4/7/2012 @ 7:13 pmSimon- I think he does often think before he says things. It’s just that being thoughtful and truthful are not his aims.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 4/7/2012 @ 7:18 pmWell, then I don’t think he is smart at all, MD. I have long worried that BHO has very seldom been told anything was a bad idea or unwise.
Which takes us back to the transcripts issue.
Simon Jester (547399) — 4/7/2012 @ 7:37 pmWhile Obama’s comments were dumb, where did he argue that the Court couldn’t overturn the law?
So isn’t Tribe technically correct, that “… President Obama fully accepts the Supreme Court’s authority… “?
Those who argue that words have meanings ought to know the difference between ‘will not take’… and ‘could not take’.
And JD: sorry, but not a single reference to either Republicans or the mushy middle, so you need to work some other angle on this one.
steve (254463) — 4/7/2012 @ 7:46 pmI thought Timb was out of here after his attacks on DRJ.
nk (52d02a) — 4/7/2012 @ 7:46 pmHow many Bothans I mean strawmen died to bring us this information,
http://globalpublicsquare.blogs.cnn.com/2012/04/07/zakaria-assessing-americas-recovery/?hpt=hp_t3
narciso (132802) — 4/7/2012 @ 7:47 pmHmmm. nk, would you explain to me why anyone would attack DRJ? I can understand attacking me or thee. But DRJ?
That’s just crazy.
Simon Jester (547399) — 4/7/2012 @ 7:54 pmSo isn’t Tribe technically correct, that “… President Obama fully accepts the Supreme Court’s authority… “?
That might be technically correct if that is what Teh One actually had said. But he didn’t, so Tribe isn’t technically correct. He is wrong, at best. Something Tribe said earlier on the week.
JD (34d969) — 4/7/2012 @ 8:08 pm“So isn’t Tribe technically correct, that “… President Obama fully accepts the Supreme Court’s authority… “?”
steve – Yes, Tribe was correct when he said Obama misspoke in his piece. Deal with it.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 4/7/2012 @ 8:10 pmsteve, if it hinged on “will” versus “could” … but it doesn’t. The key word Obama had to walk back from was “unprecedented”.
foxbat (73be7a) — 4/7/2012 @ 8:17 pmOr how a strong majority passed the law.
JD (34d969) — 4/7/2012 @ 8:21 pmNo, Obama has made it quite clear that on certain decisions, like Citizens United, perhaps because
narciso (132802) — 4/7/2012 @ 8:23 pmthey only entail negative liberties, they are’acting stupidly’ interesting the ruling on SB 1070, doesn’t seem in his mind, at this time,
Because we all know that a strong majority is the relevant metric when determining if a law followed the Constitution.
JD (34d969) — 4/7/2012 @ 8:23 pmSimon, the only reason that makes sense for the one to say what he did, I think, is that he wants the bulk of Americans to think “the Supreme Court did something radical and almost unheard of in overruling ObamaCare. We need to reelect Obama so that he can appoint more Supreme Court justices who will be reasonable and not R wing ideologues”.
Just because that is nonsense doesn’t mean it isn’t what he wants the majority of people (who, if paying attention, are paying attention to the main stream apologists) to believe.
I’ve mentioned this before. There are two levels to evaluate things. One level concerns whether statements and policies are valid, true, etc., on another level is political manipulation. Between the two, the one wants political victory so he can continue to do whatever he wants.
I could be wrong, but I don’t think so.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 4/7/2012 @ 8:28 pmThis.
But the media is so dishonest — look at the intentional defaming editing of the Zimmerman 911 call.
Random (a01c37) — 4/7/2012 @ 9:06 pmTimmah! Timmah! Timmah!!!
Icy (885201) — 4/7/2012 @ 10:13 pmIs it so hard for President Obama to admit he misspoke?
Comment by Michael Ejercito — 4/7/2012 @ 5:20 pm
— For President We-Are-The-Ones-We’ve-Been-Waiting-For it is impossible to admit such a thing.
Icy (885201) — 4/7/2012 @ 10:32 pmBecause we all know that a strong majority is the relevant metric when determining if a law followed the Constitution.
— 50,000,000 Socialists can’t be wrong!
Icy (885201) — 4/7/2012 @ 10:34 pmMD, you are exactly right. He’s trying to win the battle in the court of public opinion by following the axiom of “you can fool some of the people some of the time,” and that’s all there is to it.
Icy (885201) — 4/7/2012 @ 10:39 pmTIMMAH:
Uh, you’re wrong.
— Uh, you’re lame.
The four “conservative” activists on the Court were primarily concerned with re-legislating the ACA than determining its Constutionality.
— Aww, did you-ums tink that one up all by yourself, timmins? Where, during ANY part of the oral arguments, did any of the conservative (no quotes) justices direct the Congress as to how the law should have been written? Go ahead; we’ll wait for your answer . . .
Notice the almost total lack of precedent discussion
— Perhaps because the point of the lawsuit by the state attorney’s general is that this legislation is unprecedented in an unconstitutional kinda way.
notice Scala’s explicit rejection of his own arguments from Raich
— Notice timmah. Notice timmah lie repeatedly AND unconvincingly.
notice the putative balls on these 5 tools
— notice timmah noticing other guys’ balls (that’s why they call Kennedy ‘the schwing vote’).
who would overturn two democratically elected branches on a subject fought over in the 2008 election, which took a year of compromises amongst “stakeholders” and participating legislators to enact over a fit of conservative piqué.
— Translation: they couldn’t even get enough Democrats to vote for it without making several back-room concessions and sweetheart deals. So, your response to Patterico’s assertion [were you to actually respond to the subject of his post (talk about unprecedented!)] would be: Tribe IS lying because Obama’s initial statement was correct. Brilliant!
These 5 dudes are not rulers, in case you’ve forgotten the last thirty years of lectures on “activism” and “judicial restraint” that you Federalist Society types have been tossing our way.
— Which is why they, A) are not going to force we the people to purchase a commercial product; and, B) are not going to allow the other branches of government to force us into doing it either.
You know, like the President pointed out in his remarks just prior to your panties getting wadded up.
Icy (885201) — 4/8/2012 @ 12:24 am— Panties & balls. Mr Santorum is calling the FBI on you as we speak. Quick, grab your hard drive (not THAT one, the real one) and flee your mom’s basement!
Olson and Tribe 2008 article regarding McCain’s eligibility per NBC:
“The Constitution does not define the meaning of “natural born Citizen.” The U.S. Supreme Court gives meaning to terms that are not expressly defined in the Constitution by looking to the context in which those terms are used; to statutes enacted by the First Congress…and to the common law at the time of the Founding…. These sources all confirm that the phrase “natural born” includes both birth abroad to parents who were citizens, and birth within a nation’s territory and allegiance….
If the Panama Canal Zone was sovereign U.S. territory at the time of Senator McCain’s birth, then that fact alone would make him a “natural born” citizen under the well-established principle that “natural born” citizenship includes birth within the territory and allegiance of the United States…Premising “natural born” citizenship on the character of the territory in which one is born is rooted in the common-law understanding that persons born within the British kingdom and under loyalty to the British Crown–including most of the Framers themselves, who were born in the American colonies–were deemed natural born subjects.”
Olson and Tribe overlook the 1868 US Supreme Court’s unanimous decision of Minor V Happersett that defined NBC:
“The question is presented in this case, whether, since the adoption of the fourteenth amendment, a woman, who is a citizen of the United States and of the State of Missouri, is a voter in that State, notwithstanding the provision of the constitution and laws of the State, which confine the right of suffrage to men alone. We might, perhaps, decide the case upon other grounds, but this question is fairly made.
There is no doubt that women may be citizens. They are persons, and by the fourteenth amendment “all persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof” are expressly declared to be “citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.” But, in our opinion, it did not need this amendment to give them that position. Before its adoption the Constitution of the United States did not in terms prescribe who should be citizens of the United States or of the several States, yet there were necessarily such citizens without such provision.
Additions might always be made to the citizenship of the United States in two ways: first, by birth, and second, by naturalization. This is apparent from the Constitution itself, for it provides [n6] that “no person except a natural-born citizen, or a citizen of the United States at the time of the adoption of the Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President,” [n7] and that Congress shall have power “to establish a uniform rule of naturalization.” Thus new citizens may be born or they may be created by naturalization.
The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.”
Tin Foil Wearing Birther Nut (6dbcc2) — 4/8/2012 @ 6:37 amWTF
JD (34d969) — 4/8/2012 @ 6:44 amJD, a lot of that is copypasta.
It’s a moby. Perhaps Buck Bradley who should be worrying a little more about warrants and a little less about childish internet games, but that’s just one guess.
Dustin (330eed) — 4/8/2012 @ 6:53 amWhois Buck Bradley?
JD (34d969) — 4/8/2012 @ 6:59 amWTF, indeed.
Tribe is a Harvard hack for the left. For some of us that thought a pertinent question was needlessly ignored, the professor seemed oblivious to a unique landmark decision in 1874 that specifically framed Virginia Minor’s citizenship with the same criteria as that stipulated for presidential eligibility.
“We might, perhaps, decide the case upon other grounds, but this question is fairly made.”
“But, in our opinion, it did not need this amendment to give them that position.”
Tin Foil Wearing Birther Nut (6dbcc2) — 4/8/2012 @ 7:00 amTribe ought to apply for a job cleaning up the Harris Ranch cattle feed lot along I-5 up in the San Joaquin Valley. This piece demonstrates that the can stack that “stuff” higher, wider and deeper than most folks. I think the tipoff was “brilliant constitutional scholar” in referring to Obama.
Mike Myers (dc4fc0) — 4/8/2012 @ 7:16 amI was about to ask WTF any of that has to do with Barcky’s mistakes/lies and Tribe’s subsequent nonsense, but I really don’t care.
JD (34d969) — 4/8/2012 @ 7:17 am0bama knows how
Colonel Haiku (d0f994) — 4/8/2012 @ 7:19 amto keep unemployment down:
discourage workers
and He is risen!
Colonel Haiku (d0f994) — 4/8/2012 @ 7:27 aminiquity of us all
Lord has laid on Him
Happy Easter!
Colonel Haiku (d0f994) — 4/8/2012 @ 7:27 amJD, sorry for the misunderstanding…
For some that actually give a damn, it still matters whether supposed highly regarded constitutional scholars are being genuine in their esteemed opinion. Tribe is a liar, how can you not be aware of the singular instance when our highest court reflected on the meaning of presidential eligibility?
Most Americans believe that mere birth in our country constitutes a legitimate right for presidential office per the 14th…children of illegals are a go and kids born to US servicemembers abroad not so much. Read the 1971 USSC Rogers v Bellei for clarity about the impact of the 1868 amendment.
Tribe polluted the waters with his grossly expedient constitutional slant to support a fellow leftist. I’m a nut, but he’s a disingenuous hack.
Tin Foil Wearing Birther Nut (6dbcc2) — 4/8/2012 @ 7:28 amYes, Happy Easter!
Who wants to discuss whether Judas got a bad rap? The way I figure, Jesus knew that his dying on the cross was integral to our salvation…it was predestined and required that He be offered up to the authorities to achieve this end. I think Judas deserves more understanding and sympathy…Jesus appears to know and ask for this during the last supper. Then again, I am a self professed nut.
Tin Foil Wearing Birther Nut (6dbcc2) — 4/8/2012 @ 7:48 amObama and Tribe are masters of the English language as is evident from Obama’s clarification & Tribes editorials.
The problem is the slave mentality which you are still subject to it.
max (131bc0) — 4/8/2012 @ 7:49 amjesus is my virtue and judas is the demon I cling to is my understanding
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 4/8/2012 @ 8:08 am1971 USSC Rogers v Bellei reflecting on the 1898 Wong Kim Ark decision:
“But it [the first sentence of the Fourteenth Amendment] has not touched the acquisition of citizenship by being born abroad of American parents; and has left that subject to be regulated, as it had always been, by Congress, in the exercise of the power conferred by the Constitution to establish an uniform rule of naturalization.”
Thus, at long last, there emerged an express constitutional definition of citizenship. But it was one restricted to the combination of three factors, each and all significant: birth in the United States, naturalization in the United States, and subjection to the jurisdiction of the United States. The definition obviously did not apply to any acquisition of citizenship by being born abroad of an American parent. That type, and any other not covered by the Fourteenth Amendment, was necessarily left to proper congressional action.”
The 1971 case illustrated that born citizens per WKA’s definition of 14th citizenship naturalizes the children of some Americans born abroad and allows for those born in the US to illegals to a status superior. Did Tribe, the preeminent constitutional scholar give this mention? McCain was a natural born citizen according to Tribe who apparently has no knowledge of our highest court’s decisions.
Tin Foil Wearing Birther Nut (6dbcc2) — 4/8/2012 @ 8:13 amHappyfeet, how bad a person can you be that follows and professes the man as Lord…and later cannot live with himself after causing his death?
Tin Foil Wearing Birther Nut (6dbcc2) — 4/8/2012 @ 8:15 am30 pieces of silver bad?
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 4/8/2012 @ 8:21 amHappyfeet, I’m a soldier in the service of the country, constitution and the president…I get paid, too. Is it for the money?
The silver is incidental to the man’s mission, perhaps at the behest of his Lord. Not sure, but worth consideration.
Tin Foil Wearing Birther Nut (6dbcc2) — 4/8/2012 @ 8:24 amcountry, constitution and the president
pick two
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 4/8/2012 @ 8:30 amHappyfeet, my oath actually requires obedience to the constitution and the the president/officers over me. The last few years have left me in a bit of conflict with the constitution and my commander in chief.
I would have appreciated my fellow Americans wondering if the constitution still mattered when it pertains to who can hold office. Arthur was born to a Brit father (not known until 2009) and Obama ran openly in 2008 as someone born with dual nationality. No one else in our history has done such. Absolutely unprecedented and yet no one blinks.
Tin Foil Wearing Birther Nut (6dbcc2) — 4/8/2012 @ 8:37 amJohn McCain assured us that this Barack Obama was a super great guy who’d make a fabulous president.
At the time that was good enough for a lot of people.
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 4/8/2012 @ 8:43 amHappyfeet, both McCain and Obama are patriots…not sure which country or constitution.
Obama was raised to distrust whitey, hate capitalism, and use smear tactics/intimidation for political purpose.
Perhaps you are aware that Obama’s 1980 selective service registration is being questioned? There should be no doubt that anti-government, anti-capitalist, anti-american would jump at the chance to register for call up to fight communism in the 1980s.
Tin Foil Wearing Birther Nut (6dbcc2) — 4/8/2012 @ 8:50 amI know Obama’s an utterly manufactured Harvard trash fraud but I’m not well versed in a lot of the details.
Come November it’s a moot point, whatever happens.
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 4/8/2012 @ 8:53 amHappyfeet, no doubt you are…pardon the rant. Cheers.
Tin Foil Wearing Birther Nut (6dbcc2) — 4/8/2012 @ 8:55 amTWBN, go find the threads where we talked about your obsession years ago. Your nonsense was already rebuted.
SPQR (f62ad3) — 4/8/2012 @ 8:56 amSPQR, roger. You’re not to be bothered with espoused dislike of Tribe for reasons expressed. Why do you believe my thoughts are unwarranted? Have you given my questions consideration and found them unnecessary? What exactly made think the eligibility question something to move on from…did Tribe dispel your qualms?
Happy Easter.
Tin Foil Wearing Birther Nut (6dbcc2) — 4/8/2012 @ 9:02 amSPQR,
“What exactly made [you] think the eligibility question something to move on from…did Tribe dispel your qualms?”
Did you have your say and think it sufficient? Obama ridicules and marginalizes his opponents, is this your habit also. Please answer the question.
If Tribe is a constitutional hack and willing to obfuscate his awareness of the United States Supreme Court understanding of Art II and the 14th, is this something that also works for you for whatever purpose?
Tin Foil Wearing Birther Nut (6dbcc2) — 4/8/2012 @ 9:38 amObsess much?
JD (34d969) — 4/8/2012 @ 9:40 amTroll. Waste no time on it.
Patterico (f598ef) — 4/8/2012 @ 9:40 amSPQR, is this a person with a History here? I swear, there needs to be a FAQ about this kind of thing.
Simon Jester (641ac6) — 4/8/2012 @ 9:41 amAnd if Patterico out and out calls a person a troll, that is good enough for me.
Simon Jester (641ac6) — 4/8/2012 @ 9:41 amPatterico = Jesus
(Well, no wonder the April Fools joke offended so many people.)
Random (85a9db) — 4/8/2012 @ 9:43 amAll, didn’t mean to upset the status quo of conviction on matters considered previously settled for reasons unarticulated.
Hypocritical smug commentary is not a counter-argument.
If you agree with Professor Tribe, just say so.
Happy Easter.
Tin Foil Wearing Birther Nut (6dbcc2) — 4/8/2012 @ 9:46 amPatterico, I comment occasionally and mean no harm. Not exactly sure what the definition of troll may be, perhaps I fit the mold.
Yes, I feel strongly that a constitutional point of order has been overlooked, one that Tribe had a hand deciding.
Great site…thanks for letting me post. I’ll stop being a nuisance to those who apparently know better.
-Pieter Nosworthy
Happy Easter. The day someoe arose so that others might know salvation from evil and tyranny.
Tin Foil Wearing Birther Nut (6dbcc2) — 4/8/2012 @ 9:53 amTin Foil Wearing Birther Nut – Do you have your own blog where interested folks can read about your theories or do you just take up space on other peoples’ blogs?
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 4/8/2012 @ 9:53 amLaurence Tribe still is alive??
Tsar Nicholas II (89a442) — 4/8/2012 @ 9:54 amIt’s not lying….”per se”.
It’s… nuancing. Yeah, that’s the ticket.
Tribe is nuancing for President Downgrade.
Yeah.
Yeah.
IGotBupkis, Legally Defined Cyberbully in All 57 States (8e2a3d) — 4/8/2012 @ 9:55 am.
.
=================================================
As an extension of what is going on, I’d cite an excellent piece by neo-neocon:
The precedent is Wickard v. Filburn, not Marbury v. Madison
It’s an excellent piece, and points out some interesting SCotUS history that so far hasn’t been noted anywhere else that I’ve seen.
=================================================
.
.
IGotBupkis, Legally Defined Cyberbully in All 57 States (8e2a3d) — 4/8/2012 @ 9:57 amdaleyrocks, not any more…I pussed out and deleted my blog after the military started going after those that questioned the president’s eligibility to hold office.
Not happy with my poor character, but there it is.
Tin Foil Wearing Birther Nut (6dbcc2) — 4/8/2012 @ 9:58 amOh, I suppose you are right, all-knowing Random. We should doubt everyone. Maybe even your own statement.
Patterico, even on Easter, is not Jesus.
But he does fight with a lot of trolls. Which is what I meant.
You sure do like to be unpleasant. So have fun.
Simon Jester (ec84b4) — 4/8/2012 @ 9:58 amLaurence Tribe speaks with a forked tongue. Any undergraduate poli sci 101 student would flunk the final exam if he used Obama’s idiot argument.
For a Harvard Law Professor to sully himself in defense of Obama’s disingenuous indicates either senility or disingenuous squared.
ropelight (f0d2cb) — 4/8/2012 @ 10:02 amThe PJM article regarding Wickard v Filburn is fascinating and entirely pertinent. Tribe would not bother to reflect on such, either it not having relevance or his sheer lack of awareness.
Harvard should be respected and thanked for producing such outstanding vocal constitutional luminaries.
Tin Foil Wearing Birther Nut (6dbcc2) — 4/8/2012 @ 10:17 amIt’s not even that.
It’s a recognition that Patterico is a human being with both self-interests and biases, known and mostly unknown, and your mode of thinking isn’t sound.
Random (85a9db) — 4/8/2012 @ 10:35 amHe might even on occasion make mistakes. That is a possibility.
Random (85a9db) — 4/8/2012 @ 10:37 amCalifornia time…SPQR and Patterico. Look, it’s been awhile and nothing. I’m an accused troll that has specifically cited his disquiet with Tribe’s lack of constitutional concern with McCain-Obama’s eligibility to hold office?
I understand that that the eligibility question has been settled to everyone’s pleasure…did Tribe have a factor in this result?
Minor v Happersett unanimously and uniquely described something Obama does not enjoy, both parents being US citizens to be eligible for the presidency.
Rogers v Bellei states that those born abroad to US citizens are naturalized and not eligible for the presidency. Tribe is apparently unaware of this 1971 decision per McCain.
Hmmmm. Important question and no reflection of pertinent USSC decisions.
Who amongst you behaves more like Tribe than you’d like to believe?
Tin Foil Wearing Birther Nut (6dbcc2) — 4/8/2012 @ 10:39 amAh, but yours on the other hand, is without blemish!
Riiiigght.
Simon Jester (ec84b4) — 4/8/2012 @ 11:37 amSomeone’s been dipping his tin-foil cup into the egg dye.
Icy (ce8ca9) — 4/8/2012 @ 11:54 amClues, some people have none.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 4/8/2012 @ 12:36 pmLet’s start quoting discredited faux scientists who fail Daubert examinations. Ready. Go.
JD (34d969) — 4/8/2012 @ 12:51 pmPieter Nosworthy, wearing his tin-foil Easter bonnet, dropped these little bunny pellets of wisdom:
Tribe is a liar, how can you not be aware of the singular instance when our highest court reflected on the meaning of presidential eligibility?
— I think(?) what he’s saying is that because Tribe (allegedly) lied about presidential eligibility, that alone is proof that Tribe is lying about what Obama said regarding this case. Liars lie . . . or something.
Who wants to discuss whether Judas got a bad rap?
Matthew 27:3-5
Then Judas, his betrayer, seeing that Jesus had been condemned, deeply regretted what he had done. He returned the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and elders, saying, “I have sinned in betraying innocent blood.” They said, “What is that to us? Look to it yourself.”
Flinging the money into the temple, he departed and went off and hanged himself.
— A guilty conscience is usually a fairly reliable indicator of, oh, I don’t know . . . guilt?
how bad a person can you be that follows and professes the man as Lord…and later cannot live with himself after causing his death?
— Suicide is a sin.
I’m a soldier in the service of the country, constitution and the president…I get paid, too. Is it for the money?
— The ARMY paid you to betray your Lord? Bad ARMY! Bad, bad, bad, bad, bad!!! Now, go cut me a switch and drop your drawers. And after your whuppin’ you can just go hit the sack without any C-rations!
my oath actually requires obedience to the constitution and the the president/officers over me. The last few years have left me in a bit of conflict with the constitution
— Why? Has the Constitution changed? Not that I know of.
and my commander in chief.
— No doubt your CiC is a bumbling clown. So? You don’t serve him. You serve your country under his direction. Thank You for your service.
Arthur was born to a Brit father (not known until 2009)
Icy (ce8ca9) — 4/8/2012 @ 1:25 pm— The fact that Chester A. Arthur’s father was born in Northern Ireland was NOT “not known until 2009”. You are completely full of crap on this one. As a matter of ACTUAL fact, there was a birther controversy contemporaneous to Arthur’s nomination for Vice-President. I’ll give you this much: it was the same type of bs that you’re peddling now.
Here’s the contitutional, precedented answer to “Professor” Tribe on the second-gussing/rewriting nonsense. For a long time now, it is the Court’s practice not to strike down a law if it can in anway be construed as constitutional or if it can be made constitutional by taking out the unconstitutional parts.
nk (52d02a) — 4/8/2012 @ 1:49 pmboth McCain and Obama are patriots…not sure which country or constitution.
— Really. You’re not sure which country or constitution John McCain, who during the entire time that you were crapping your diapers was lying flat on his back in a Vietnamese rat-hole, is loyal to? Well, perhaps you’re right. Maybe he gets up every day and celebrates his Panamian birth by saluting a photo of Manuel Noriega. Asshat.
Obama was raised to distrust whitey, hate capitalism, and use smear tactics/intimidation for political purpose.
— Damn, you’re right! It’s all there in the brouchure for the Chicago-politics campus of the Harvard madrasah. Gee, that must have been awkward for grandma:
“No, Barack. You spell it k-r-a-c-k-a.”
Perhaps you are aware that Obama’s 1980 selective service registration is being questioned?
— Every single aspect of his entire life is being questioned. Some of the questions are more important than others, but without substantive answers the questions themselves don’t mean all that much.
If you agree with Professor Tribe, just say so.
Icy (ce8ca9) — 4/8/2012 @ 2:12 pm— Nobody here agrees with Tribe. Nobody here (not even timmah!) has said that they agree with Tribe. The problem is your false equivalence of “if Tribe is wrong about one aspect of the Constitution then he is automatically wrong about anything he says about any other aspect of the Constitution”.
And then there’s Mitt Romney’s father. The man was born in MEXICO for chrissakes! And both he AND his son have run for president. Geez, it’s getting so you can’t remember the last time a real American ran for the office!
Icy (ce8ca9) — 4/8/2012 @ 2:20 pm“Panamanian” [mangled courtesy of the late Steve Jobs]
Icy (ce8ca9) — 4/8/2012 @ 2:25 pmAnd Bill Richardson’s father was born in Nicaragua, but was a Boston banker, who lived in Mexico, making Billy a ‘White Hispanic’
narciso (a97276) — 4/8/2012 @ 3:12 pmRIP Mike Wallace
Icy (ce8ca9) — 4/8/2012 @ 4:20 pmHe has gone on to the Great Ambush Interview in the Sky… stole that one from Iowahawk…
Colonel Haiku (08264b) — 4/8/2012 @ 4:56 pmMcCain was born in a navy hospital in the Canal Zone, the stupid is stultifying sometimes.
narciso (0a9e8c) — 4/8/2012 @ 4:59 pm112. Ogabe’s prob, and that of Ann’s, was that he was the son of Stanley’s bud.
First black president not a biggie. First son of a pederast, eewww.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 4/8/2012 @ 5:32 pmWell I don’t delve into that particular stewpot, but it is clear, from his disdain for Churchill,
narciso (0a9e8c) — 4/8/2012 @ 5:38 pmto his expressions of misogynism, to many of his
other tropes, that FRank Davis was a powerful
influence in his life,
Gary,
Ghost (6f9de7) — 4/8/2012 @ 6:00 pmDefinitely not the first son of a pederast.
And I really don’t care who his dad was or wasn’t. He’s destroying the country. The only question to me is is he evil or inept?
Ghost (6f9de7) — 4/8/2012 @ 6:03 pmwhat this Laurence Tribe needs is some honesty lessons
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 4/8/2012 @ 6:18 pmAnswer: YES
Icy (ce8ca9) — 4/8/2012 @ 6:19 pmMr. Obama is more evil than inept but it gets confuzzling cause of how he’s not very adroit at being evil
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 4/8/2012 @ 6:28 pmI can’t imagine swearing an oath to serve someone what is so blatantly contemptuous of all things America though so what I did earlier was I googled it … I think from my googlings that in real life it would go like this for private happyfeet…
I can live with that it doesn’t say I have to respect our douchebag anti-American president, just do constitutional stuff, not let myself be coerced, and be solemn and whatever.
And you’ll also note it doesn’t say I have to slap tattoos all over myself like graffitti on an I-5 overpass.
So when Mr. Tin Foil said “my oath requires obedience to the constitution and the president/officers over me” that may be techinically true but between you and your God you’re not promising to kiss douchebag anti-American ass.
Just do your best.
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 4/8/2012 @ 6:41 pmThat was so beautiful it made me tear up a little bit, feets.
elissa (a08aef) — 4/8/2012 @ 6:49 pmi shoulda worked in the word “ineffable” somewheres
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 4/8/2012 @ 6:51 pmThat T.S. Eliot guy sure did know how to work in the word “ineffable” into his stuff.
elissa (a08aef) — 4/8/2012 @ 7:00 pmWell, if you swear an oath to defend the Constitution against all domestic enemies . . .
Icy (ce8ca9) — 4/8/2012 @ 7:05 pmgood points all
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 4/8/2012 @ 7:08 pmI knew a woman what was ineffable.
carlitos (49ef9f) — 4/8/2012 @ 7:12 pmif you liked it then you shoulda put a ring on it Mr. carlitos
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 4/8/2012 @ 7:21 pm🙂
Happy Easter, Mr. Feets.
carlitos (49ef9f) — 4/8/2012 @ 7:22 pmHappy Easter Mr. carlitos!
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 4/8/2012 @ 7:29 pmI think I’m going to make myself a peanut butter & jelly sandwich.
And then I’ll make 17 posts in a 55 comment thread at Patterico.com
My streams of consciousness are so enlightening, that I feel compelled to share them with everyone…every two minutes.
By the way, I’m so happy that I have feet !
Band Aid (0ae97d) — 4/8/2012 @ 7:31 pmPeople like “band aid” that bag on happyfeet suck.
JD (318f81) — 4/8/2012 @ 7:34 pm🙄
carlitos (49ef9f) — 4/8/2012 @ 7:34 pmcarlitos!
Leviticus (870be5) — 4/8/2012 @ 7:37 pmthank you Mr. JD!
Mr. Band Aid why so hostile? It’s a big internet and these threads they are long and sometimes they are so so quietudinous, like heads on Mt. Rushmore. Just a lot smaller.
So sometimes when they’re quiet I’ll say hey girl, why so quiet?
And just let things flow from there.
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 4/8/2012 @ 7:40 pmMy gramma said to rip off old band-aids real quick because it hurts even more and prolongs the pain to your skin if you peel them off slowly.
elissa (a08aef) — 4/8/2012 @ 7:41 pmI used to be insouciant.
JD (318f81) — 4/8/2012 @ 7:43 pmyou’re still a lot more insouciant than a stick in the eye I think
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 4/8/2012 @ 7:45 pmThis doesn’t ever not make me smile. Thanks.
(old timers know this is an old Karl / feets thing, but whatevs)
With apologies to the Colonel:
Insouciant sandwich,
carlitos (49ef9f) — 4/8/2012 @ 7:50 pmis full of P B and J
awaits my eating
I cannot process that.
JD (318f81) — 4/8/2012 @ 7:51 pmMr. feets should also be commended for providing a public service by focusing on cool underused words like that special page in Reader’s Digest used to. Lord knows the pathetic public school system doesn’t teach our young uns cool words anymore.
elissa (a08aef) — 4/8/2012 @ 7:51 pmHi Carlitos, I remind you of our previous conversation on Svensmark’s hypothesis and have some new information and a question for you on the relative thread.
Random (97f484) — 4/8/2012 @ 7:53 pm*relevant (typing on iPhone is a challenge)
Random (97f484) — 4/8/2012 @ 7:55 pmBand-Aids stick to the orangutan hairs on my skin.
Icy (ce8ca9) — 4/8/2012 @ 7:56 pm🙁
Wow. Obsess much?
No, I haven’t formulated an opinion on the Svensmark hypothesis. Unlike conspiracy theorists who adhere to “cargo cult” science, I do not plan to learn every detail of climatology for myself. I’ll live with the consensus on the issue. Feel free to laugh at me; I’ll be fine, even if I disagree with people whom I respect like Brother Bradley and daleyrocks.
And, as a relatively new iPhone user, I’d urge you to stop typing and just talk to the thing. You feel ridiculous for a while, but it’s a shorter learning curve.
carlitos (49ef9f) — 4/8/2012 @ 8:06 pmThe Svensmark Hypothesis
Matt Damon smells franchise
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 4/8/2012 @ 8:13 pm‘Spose if we made a big deal of the nude pics in open-toed spikes and pillbox clasp earrings of madonna Ann, ibn Dunham’s goose would be cooked?
Me neither. He needs the Sadam finis. Bad.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 4/8/2012 @ 9:01 pmSweet Risen Jesus, feets, best laugh all day.
Ghost (6f9de7) — 4/8/2012 @ 9:17 pmThe obligatory CinC saves his godless azz in a war not of his making:
http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2012/04/07/goodspeed-analysis-middle-east-could-collapse-into-full-conflict-if-international-talks-fail-next-week/
gary gulrud (d88477) — 4/8/2012 @ 9:18 pm160. Agreed, an agile mind.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 4/8/2012 @ 9:20 pmI found an ant in my sushi once.
nk (52d02a) — 4/8/2012 @ 9:27 pmDated more than one girl that in-eff-able, too, at least by me.
nk (52d02a) — 4/8/2012 @ 9:44 pmHarvard man.
Bill (af584e) — 4/9/2012 @ 7:21 am