partisanship

It Depends on How You Define ‘Outburst’

Much has been made of the SOTU “face-off” between President Obama and Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito. Leave it to both sides to try and score political points of a non-issue.

“It almost defies logic, reason and respect; however, Barack Hussein Obama did the unthinkable during his first State of the Union Speech and tried to intimidate the Supreme Court of the United States,” wrote one conservative blogger.

“So much for separation of powers, but Obama thinks he is above everything.”

Meanwhile, on “Meet the Press” this morning presidential adviser David Axelrod described Alito’s silent rebuttal as a “inappropriate outburst.” Really? Mouthing the words “not true” qualifies as an outburst?

Both Obama and Alito may have broken tradition but the exchange hardly merits hand-wringing. Presidents can, and do, disagree with Supreme Court decisions. And justices, like everyone else, have the right to disagree with the a president’s assessment. Neither was trying to usurp the other — they were just being honest.

About these ads
Standard

3 thoughts on “It Depends on How You Define ‘Outburst’

  1. atlpaddy says:

    In Andrew Jackson’s case, he REALLY disagreed with the Supreme Court’s decision – just ask the Cherokee.

  2. So those of us who think corporate influence sullies our political system are liars?

    Obama doesn’t have much credibility on this issue, as he declined federal matching funds in order to raise unlimited cash.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s