It’s not just an obstructionist Congress that our president has to contend with, it’s a Court that is not just activist–it, too, is obstructionist. Recall how Republicans were that liberal judges were activist judges. Shame!
The short but sad history of John Roberts’ appointment as Chief Justice goes way beyond activism. It was Robert’s strategy that resulted in the Florida sham victory that made George W Bush president–by 537 votes statewide, just hours short of a full vote count that would have made Al Gore president. This is a fact, having been fully documented by several newspaper studies. Roberts, then in private law practice, provided legal advice to Governor Jeb Bush during the weeks following the November 2000 election as part of the effort to make sure the governor’s brother won the disputed presidential vote. Had the names of Florida’s Electoral College members not been forwarded to Washington in a timely fashion, Roberts contended, Gore would have been declared the winner because Florida’s 25 electoral votes would not have been counted — and Gore had earned more electoral votes than Bush in the rest of the country. So, with Roberts’ help, the Bushes kept the presidency in the family.
Just think of how that changed America. Would we be in the economic crisis we are in today? Doubt it. Gore would not have fought two unfunded wars. Gore would not have devised a tax scheme that denied the country revenue which has led to the frighties’ dismantling of the public contract. Gore would not have sucked up to Big Pharma and given them a drug bill that added to the deficit.
In return for his efforts, Bush rewarded Roberts an appointment to the Supreme Court. Roberts was to have succeeded the retired Sandra Day O’Connor, but Bush withdrew that nomination. Instead he renominated Roberts as Rehnquist’s replacement, making him Chief Justice. In appreciation for his lifetime job, Roberts announced the Citizens United decision that continues to take our country down the Alice in Wonderland hole to political disaster. Who needs ‘one man-one vote’ when we could replace a fundamental democratic principle with ‘one dollar-one vote’?
I’m no economist but, it appears to many who are that, Ben Bernanke and the Federal Reserve are not enabling America’s economy to emerge from a killer recession. Bernanke has been cited for his inability to foresee the financial crisis. Then there’s the contention that Paulson and Bernanke colluded to withhold the extent of Merrill Lynch’s losses to Bank of America. He favors reforming Social Security and Medicare, contending that it is entitlement programs that will lead to America’s economic ruin. More recently he has recognized the need to increase tax revenues.
So the deck that has been dealt Obama has lots of jokers–all red suits. He is contending with an obstructionist Congress that is doing the bidding of Grover Norquist and the Tea Party, a Supreme Court that is activist when it comes to changing the Constitution as it sees fit, and economists who, for political reasons, are unwilling to do anything over the next several months that might help an economy that has been long treading water.
Fortunately, the majority of Americans support the president. Happily, a post-recall survey of Wisconsin voters showed a stable 8-9 point preference of Obama over Romney. Most
Americans recognize that our President has performed remarkably well given the political environment–on domestic an
Too bad those values don’t often enough apply to the opposition.d foreign policy. They see him as honest, resolute, and ethical.