It isn't the place to chastise the Supreme Court on recent decisions, sorry, that isn't true. Just like, Joint sessions of Congress aren't for rescuing your overbearing and losing politically health care fiasco. Just like, Press conferences designed for health care aren't designed to tangent off into some Cambridge Police event that turns out to be the next days main topic of discussion, thus, rather than having Repubs in to discuss health care, we had to embarrass ourselves with a beer summit at the WH so we didn't look so out of touch. Obama is such an amateur, such a disaster. The first lesson in public speaking any of us learn is to remain on topic. Obama off the teleprompter is a class one disaster of the first magnitude.The SOTU is the place, and has been for many many Presidents before Obama. The fact that you never noticed until now is telling.
This President defines flip flop. He makes John Kerry look rock solid and consistent. What a joke.
Last edited by Charles Martel; 02-01-10 at 03:56 PM.
It was the Austrasians, that hewed on bravely through the thick of the fight, it was they who found and cut down the Saracen King.
wow! Media Matters? Really? Is that what we are degraded to accepting as final word on something now? A hack site that purposely snips, and cuts transcripts so as to shape their biased drivel?
So let's see what it is that they are attributing Reagan with attacking....They say two times.
Once in 1984 when he attacked the decision made more than 10 years earlier, not what I would consider a direct attack on the members sitting before him. And then there is the 1988 SOTU they cite, and the citation....
How in the absolute hell is that anything like this?:Originally Posted by Reagan 1988 SOTU
Originally Posted by Obama attacking the Court
Now let's check what Obama said for fact.
Politifact, the Pulitzer Prize-winning Web site from the St. Petersburg Times, did some research when Obama first made the claim in his weekly radio address last weekend and found that it was barely true. Obama's statements on whether foreign companies can spend money in U.S. political campaigns "overstated the ruling's immediate impact."
Current federal law prevents "a partnership, association, corporation, organization, or other combination of persons organized under the laws of or having its principal place of business in a foreign country" from making, "directly or indirectly," a donation or expenditure "in connection with a federal, state, or local election," to a political party committee or "for an electioneering communication."
State of the Union 2010: Fact Check of President Obama's Address - ABC News
I'd say untrue...But noting PolitiFact's already documented bias, this is damning.