COMMENTARY | President Barack Obama attended an Associated Press luncheon Tuesday during which he took several questions. Naturally, the topic of the warning he issued to the Supreme Court on Monday arose.
Just as a cornered badger will lash out, Obama, clearly on the ropes, lashed out at the Supreme Court on Monday. That is what the Court does -- it overturns unconstitutional laws passed by Congress. Even AP Chairman Dean Singleton pointed this out in a question at the luncheon.
Also, there was never a "strong majority" or the Democrats would not have had to use parliamentary tricks and downright conniving to pass the bill. A strong majority would mean the bill sailed through.
"We have not seen a Court overturn a law that was passed by Congress on an economic issue, like health care, that I think most people would clearly consider commerce -- a law like that has not been overturned at least since Lochner. Right? So we're going back to the '30s, pre New Deal," Obama said.
This from a self-proclaimed constitutional professor. But this is like the guy who said, "I'm not a doctor but I play one on TV." Obama is really only a lecturer not a professor as reported by FactCheck.org.
First, Lochner refers to Lochner v New York, a 1905 case dealing with working hours of a baker and the attempt to regulate them under the guise of health.
Unless he is referring to the "Lochner Era" from 1890 to 1937. But this is not "pre-New Deal." The New Deal began in 1932 during the nomination acceptance speech of tyrannical left wing hero Franklin Roosevelt.
The Supreme Court has ruled on several commerce-related issues "since Lochner," where government tried to use the commerce clause to expand its powers, including Wickard v Filburn (1942), United States v Lopez (1995) and United States v Morrison (2000), to name a few.
Perhaps the dumbest thing Obama said at the luncheon was "The burden is on those that would overturn a law like this." This is in direct conflict with the Constitution.
The Fifth, Ninth and 14th amendments ensure the burden of proof falls on the government when taking liberty or property from a citizen. Obamacare does both.
Then, as progressives always do when they have no real argument, Obama turned to emotion to justify the taking of our rights, just as they did while ramming the bill through Congress.
Obamacare's days are numbered and by proxy Obama's time as president. The end of both cannot come soon enough.
