Michele Bachmann: Obama Knows Supreme Court Will Find Health Reform Constitutional |
Michele Bachmann spun another conspiracy yarn during a stop in Fort Dodge, Iowa on Saturday, suggesting that the Obama administration is taking the Affordable Care Act to the Supreme Court because it has insider knowledge that the Court will find it Constitutional. “Remember this came at the request of the Obama administration,” she continued. “They’re the ones that favor Obamacare. So if they asked the Supreme Court to fast track this legislation, that tells me they know something that we don’t know. That tells me most likely they think they have five votes to save it or there’s a reason why they want to get it fast-tracked.” To Bachmann’s mind however, that doesn’t mean that the law is in fact constitutional, but rather further vindication that Tea Party activists must fight harder to elect her so that she can repeal it.
Herman Cain Thinks This Guy Was The Ruth Bader Ginsburg Of His Era
Daily Kos’s bernardpliers recalls a Herman Cain column from December 2010 where the GOP presidential primary candidate appears to complain that Jesus was killed by liberals.
In a column and blog post titled “The Perfect Conservative,” Cain makes the claim that Jesus was politically conservative and that he “helped the poor without one government program.” After running through a list of reasons Cain believes Jesus to be a model right-winger, the presidential contender concludes that the “liberal court” was responsible for his death:
The liberal court found Him guilty of false offences and sentenced Him to death, all because He changed the hearts and minds of men with an army of 12. His death reset the clock of time. Never before and not since has there ever been such a perfect conservative.
Cain does not explain why he finds the Roman court that sentenced and executed Jesus to be “liberal.” But his claim is baffling for all kinds of reasons, only one of which is the fact that liberals tend to be ideologically opposed to capital punishment while conservatives tend to favor it.
After the mass shooting in Tucson, Arizona, in January that claimed six lives and wounded Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D), politicians from both parties pledged to clean up their violent rhetoric. But apparently this lesson was lost on Rep. Trent Franks (R-AZ) who made light of gun violence during a congressional hearing on Friday.
REP. STEVE COHEN (D-TN): If you have a law in Arizona and they don’t have that prohibition in Ohio the person in Ohio who comes to Arizona can have a gun when they couldn’t have one in Arizona. I know in Arizona you have to have a gun.
FRANKS: In Arizona sometimes to gain office you have to have shot someone. I’m joking, of course. I hope that the media understands that.
Watch it, courtesy of Political Correction:
Despite his immediate qualification that he was merely joking, Franks’ record speaks volumes about how much he values gun safety. In the wake of the Tucson shooting, he infamously said, “I wish there had been one more gun” that day. Franks latest insensitive comments about gun violence in Arizona make it seem like Jared Loughner, the man accused of the Tuscon shooting, is the logical successor to Giffords.
Franks made his comments while the House Judiciary Committee was considering Rep. Louie Gohmert’s (R-TX) radical bill that would allow, among other things, people from states with concealed carry laws to bring guns to DC, despite it being forbidden by local gun regulations. Franks voted down Democratic amendments that would have prevented sex offenders, people on the Terrorist Watch List, those with misdemeanor convictions for stalking, and domestic abusers who have restraining orders against them from carrying guns legally outside their home states.
Judge Rejects Right-Wing Groups’ Anti-Kagan Witchhunt |
Earlier this year, the Department of Justice turned over piles of documents in response to a FOIA request for documents showing whether Judge Elena Kagan was involved in the Affordable Care Act litigation while she was solicitor general. Much to the right’s chagrin, these documents confirmed Kagan’s confirmation hearing testimony that she had no involvement whatsoever as an attorney. Nevertheless, two right-wing groups persist in their delusional belief that Kagan must have perjured herself during her hearing, and they demanded that DOJ turn over even more documents to allow them to continue their witchhunt. Last week, a federal judge shut them down.
Last August, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney announced failed Supreme Court nominee Robert Bork as the co-chair of his “Judicial Advisory Committee.” Bork’s selection was a clear sign that, if elected, Romney will appoint hard right justices with little regard for how the Constitution protects ordinary Americans. Bork once described the federal ban on whites-only lunch counters as “unsurpassed ugliness.” He believes that the government is free to ban contraception outright. And he even thinks the government can outright criminalize sex.
How about the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment? Does [Bork] still think it shouldn’t apply to women?
“Yeah,” he answers. “I think I feel justified by the fact ever since then, the Equal Protection Clause kept expanding in ways that cannot be justified historically, grammatically, or any other way. Women are a majority of the population now—a majority in university classrooms and a majority in all kinds of contexts. It seems to me silly to say, ‘Gee, they’re discriminated against and we need to do something about it.’ They aren’t discriminated against anymore.”
Statements like this one should make every American grateful that Bork never made it to the Supreme Court. Perhaps Bork never heard of Lilly Ledbetter, who spent nearly two decades earning just a fraction of what her male colleagues earned doing the same work. Maybe Bork is simply unaware that the average woman earns just 77 cents for every dollar earned by a male counterpart. But, in any case, it is clear that his perception of the world and the Constitution has no basis in reality.
Whatever Bork might have been, however, he is now nothing more than an angry old man who long ago resigned his federal judgeship and faded into obscurity. Mitt Romney, on the other hand, is a leading presidential contender and could potentially be in a position to select new Supreme Court justices. Before anyone casts a vote for or against Romney, the former governor should explain clearly and without reservation why he selected a top legal advisor who believes that gender discrimination no longer exists and that the Constitution has nothing whatsoever to say about it — and Romney must be equally clear about whether he plans to appoint judges and justices who share Bork’s dismissive attitude towards discrimination.
ThinkProgress filed this report from a campaign event in Harriman, Tennessee
Former pizza magnate Herman Cain has previously indicated that as president he would support the construction of a fence along the United States’ southern border with Mexico as a way to curb illegal immigration. Those plans, Cain joked, included plans for an alligator-filled moat.
But at a campaign stop Saturday, Cain laid out a plan more serious and even more troubling than those he has joked about in the past. As president, Cain said he would support building an electrified border fence, complete with barbed wire at the top and signs printed in English and Spanish warning those who approached the fence, “It will kill you.” If that didn’t work, Cain said he would send American troops with “real guns and real bullets” to guard the border:
CAIN: It’s going to be 20 feet high. It’s going to have barbed wire on the top. It’s going to be electrified. And there’s going to be a sign on the other side saying, ‘It will kill you — Warning.’
Sunday morning, Cain told Meet the Press host David Gregory that he was joking about this plan too, but if he was, the audience of a couple hundred couldn’t tell — the portion of Cain’s speech detailing the immigration plans drew some of his loudest cheers of the day.
Cain isn’t the only Republican presidential candidate to suggest building a border fence, a plan dismissed by Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano as an impractical way of dealing with illegal immigration into the United States. The two Republican presidential candidates who have governed border states — Texas Gov. Rick Perry and former New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson — also oppose a border fence.
Cain, however, continues to press the idea. And evidently, a 1,200-mile fence isn’t enough — Cain seems determined to make it as inhumane as possible.
Welcome to Justiceline, ThinkProgress Justice’s morning round-up of the latest legal news and developments. Remember to follow us on Twitter at @TPJustice.
The Supreme Court will hear a case that will determine whether the Constitution’s guarantee that no one will be “twice put in jeopardy of life or limb” doesn’t apply to a murder defendant who was acquitted of murder because the verdict was never officially written down.
Meanwhile, Justice Scalia explains his understanding of Virginia geography: “I consider myself a Virginian. I really didn’t sink any roots anywhere until I taught at the University of Virginia, which is the real Virginia. You know, where I live now, is Nawthern Virginia.”