Newt: ‘Are Judges Above The Rest Of The Constitution?’

[CeeKay]

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/gingrich-doubles-down-on-ignoring-judicial-decisions-are-judges-above-the-rest-of-the-constitution/

Newt Gingrich has now put his crusade against judicial activism at the forefront of his presidential campaign. Over the past week, he has argued that if elected president, he would opt to ignore certain judicial rulings if he determines the decision is not within the authority of the court. He has been attacked by Constitutional scholars and lawyers over his position, and on Face The Nation today, Gingrich defended his position to Bob Schieffer.

Gingrich cited a ruling several months ago where a judge did not fall on the side of public prayer in schools, branding it as a sign of “anti-American dictatorship.” He suggested impeachment as one course of action for judges who are not in line with American values as Gingrich sees it. He went after the modern court system for “a fundamental assault on our liberties,” and claimed the intention of the Federalists who drew up the blueprints for American government wanted the judiciary to be the weakest branch. Gingrich cited past presidents like Andrew Jackson and Abraham Lincoln who asserted their executive authority over Supreme Court decisions. In the case of the latter, Gingrich cited Lincoln’s opposition to the Dred Scott decision.

well, it's nice of him to let us know beforehand that he wants to ignore judicial rulings.  it's kinda refreshing to have this kind of open honesty.

[hepcat]

I just want to reiterate that my previous insistence that I didn't think Gingrich was being racist or preaching class warfare with his view on students working in schools was always preempted with a disclaimer that I would never vote for the guy in a million years. 

Do the republicans have any candidates that aren't raving loons?

[leo8877]

Do the republicans have any candidates that aren't raving loons?

Come on now, then they wouldn't be republicans.

[hepcat]

Do the republicans have any candidates that aren't raving loons?

Come on now, then they wouldn't be republicans.

Even though I'm not a republican, in the past there's always been at least one candidate that I thought was competent and able to lead this country, even if they didn't share all of my opinions (let's face it, agreeing with us on every issue is probably a bad idea anyway).  

This time around they just seem like a group of oddballs with dangerous ideas - Bachmann being the exception...she just comes across as the most self serving, disingenuous candidate I've ever heard.  That she still thinks she has a snowball's chance in hell for the presidency is amusing.  Every time she shows up at a debate you just wanna pat her head and say, "You did good, champ!" like you're talking to a child after a little league game.

[Autistic Angel]

Do the republicans have any candidates that aren't raving loons?

Yes: Jon Huntsman strikes me as a sober, intelligent, credible candidate with years of valuable experience to back him up.  I may not agree with many of his ideas, but at least there's a rational thought process behind them.

That's a lot more than I can say for Newt Gringrich, whose belief that the president has the power to enact or ignore any law he wishes could only stem from severe mental illness or intentional trolling.  Would this mean that if the individual mandate in the Affordable Healthcare Act is ruled unconstitutional, President Obama has the power to simply ignore the court's ruling?  Would Newt Gingrich support Obama's right to operate above the law if he decided to arrest Republican governors Scott Walker and John Kasich and replace them with Democrats?  It's legal if he says it is!  I know Gingrich has tried to clarify that at least one more branch of the government would have to concur with the executive, but if the president decided to nullify the voting rights of everyone who disagreed with him, the decision could only come out in his favor.

-Autistic Angel

[Ironrod]

Do the republicans have any candidates that aren't raving loons?

Romney will tell you whatever he thinks you want to hear. He's reasonable as long as the right hand doesn't find out what the farther-right hand is doing.

[Fireball1244]

Do the republicans have any candidates that aren't raving loons?

Yes: Jon Huntsman strikes me as a sober, intelligent, credible candidate with years of valuable experience to back him up.  I may not agree with many of his ideas, but at least there's a rational thought process behind them.

Agreed. Jon Huntsman is a very serious and intelligent person. Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong on most of the issues of the day. But a qualified candidate who is demonstrably sane and rational.

[hepcat]

Do the republicans have any candidates that aren't raving loons?

Yes: Jon Huntsman strikes me as a sober, intelligent, credible candidate with years of valuable experience to back him up.  I may not agree with many of his ideas, but at least there's a rational thought process behind them.

Agreed. Jon Huntsman is a very serious and intelligent person. Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong on most of the issues of the day. But a qualified candidate who is demonstrably sane and rational.

He just seems to have disappeared though.  Almost any report of republican candidates lately mentions newt, perry, romney and bachmann (for some reason) but rarely do i see huntsman's name.   

[Autistic Angel]

That's because Jon Huntsman's national poll numbers are in the tank.  He's a Republican who understands science well enough to believe in evolution and global warming, he flatly refused to sign Grover Norquist's anti-tax pledge on the grounds that his oath of office took precedence, and he served as the American ambassador to China at the request of the Obama administration.  As far as the Rush Limbaugh / Glenn Beck / Tea Party base of Conservative primary voters are concerned, he might as well be Bernie Sanders.

-Autistic Angel

[Ironrod]

Do the republicans have any candidates that aren't raving loons?

Yes: Jon Huntsman strikes me as a sober, intelligent, credible candidate with years of valuable experience to back him up.  I may not agree with many of his ideas, but at least there's a rational thought process behind them.

Agreed. Jon Huntsman is a very serious and intelligent person. Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong on most of the issues of the day. But a qualified candidate who is demonstrably sane and rational.

He just seems to have disappeared though.  Almost any report of republican candidates lately mentions newt, perry, romney and bachmann (for some reason) but rarely do i see huntsman's name.  

Not entirely. He's polling third among independents in NH.

Independents also favor Jon Huntsman, with 16 percent saying they would vote for him, compared with 6 percent among registered Republicans and 11 percent overall, the poll showed. The poll’s overall margin of error was plus or minus 4.2 percentage points.

Andrew Smith, director of the UNH Survey Center, said independents are more likely to vote for a candidate like Huntsman or Paul because the men are viewed as outsiders to the mainstream Republican Party.

Huntsman, as a moderate, is capturing support from independents who favor the policies of the Democratic Party. Paul, who espouses a libertarian view, is favored by independents who are unaligned with a party and the most apolitical.

In the end, though, independents’ ability to boost Huntsman or Paul may be limited because turnout among Democratic-leaning and unaligned independent voters in a Republican primary tends to be lower than among Republican-leaning independents, who now favor Romney.

It's not going to get him the nomination, but he's doing pretty well among the moderate independent voters who don't shape primaries (but who matter very much in the general election).