Going all Alinsky on SCOTUS

Judging by the tells, I’d say he has a weak hand.  On this and re-election.

From today’s WSJ op-ed wondering if the president had ever taught Marbury v. Madison:

As he runs for re-election, Mr. Obama’s inner community organizer seems to be winning out over the law professor.”

I have my doubts that going all Alinsky on SCOTUS will work, but it may be all he knows to do.  This most recent example reinforces an argument made here before:  the administration’s cavalier attitude towards separation of powers will likely create a little institutional push-back.

If I were a justice on the fence, weighing the merits which tilt towards overrule against my reluctance to “interfere,” I’d look at this, and the call out at the SOTU, and the Speaker’s response (“Are you serious?!) when queried about the Constitutionality of it all, and I’d think:  these other branches are a little drunk with power, time to remind them of checks and balances.

Someone up there must realize this.  Perhaps they want the campaign issue and the mulligan they believe will come with re-election.  Or maybe it’s just the reflexive political habits learned in Chicago, a one-party-town where bullying is often the coin of the realm.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Politics and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to Going all Alinsky on SCOTUS

  1. Paul Marks says:

    The debate about Barack Obama tends to get hung up on whether he is a socialist or not – of course he is, his background and life long associations are socialist (indeed often Marxist).

    But there is also a more important question – what sort of socialist is Barack Obama?

    Is he an idealistic socialist (like the 19th century utopean Robert Owen – and so many peace-and-love types in our own time) or is he something very different?

    Again it is Barack Obama’s past that shows us the truth – in this case the Chicago days.

    Historically the Chicago Machine under Mayor Daley (senior) was hostile to the socialists – they faught hand to hand in the streets in 1968 (no surprise which side the media coverage favoured).

    However, after the election of Harold Washington in 1983 (who the socialists supported – and the old Daley Machine mostly opposed) it became clear to some in the Machine (which had already been losing power in Chicago even before the election of Harold Washington – after all “Madam Mayor” was not the favoured candidate of the old Machine either), that a deal had to be made (if the Machine was to be reunited).

    Daley (junior) extended his hand to the socialists – and so the Chicago Machine was reunited.

    “Yes Paul we all know this stuff – it is ancient history”.

    Yes – but not all the socialists accepted the hand of Daley junior.

    After all accepting his deal meant accepting all the organized and systematic corruption of the Chicago Machine, it meant spitting (“spitting” is not the first word I thought of) on the whole idea of an honest city.

    So which way did Barack Obama jump?

    As such books as “The Case Against Barack Obama” and “The Culture of Corruption” make clear – Comrade Barack jumped into bed with the Machine (even married into it – Michelle’s father was a Ward Captain) and made its corruption his own (taking financial advantages for himself and Michelle whenever he could). He basically followed Valerie Jarrett (always very close to Barack) line of take as much as you can lay your hands on – whilst justifying the whole thing as a way of bankrupting a corrupt “capitalist” system (socialists, of this sort, often use this nice method of self justification).

    The reformers got no help from Barack – he was part of the Machine, an ally of Mayor Daley and Senator Durbin.

    And he has governed as President as what he was in Chicago.

    A corrupt socialist – not an idealistic one. Someone with nothing but contempt for “ethical socialism” or any standard of personal responsibilty.

    Yes – very much a follower of Saul Alinsky.

    Barack will do anything (tell any lie, commit any crime) for POWER – justifying it to himself by saying all he does is for “the cause”.

    The end (collectivism) justifies the means (endless lies and so on) – classic Alinsky.

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