Community | March 10, 2010 | 45 comments

Gibbs Fires Back At Chief Justice Roberts Over Obama Criticism

source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/09/gibbs-fires-back-at-chief_n_492633.html

Image
WakeUpPeople
The White House fired back at Justice John Roberts Tuesday night, after the Supreme Court Chief told a crowd that he found it "very troubling" that President Barack Obama would criticize the court during his State of the Union address.

In a statement sent to reporters, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said that the only troubling thing was the 5-4 ruling by the court, which said that corporations could spend unlimited amounts of money advocating on behalf of candidates in elections. Roberts leads the court.

"What is troubling is that this decision opened the floodgates for corporations and special interests to pour money into elections - drowning out the voices of average Americans," Gibbs said. "The President has long been committed to reducing the undue influence of special interests and their lobbyists over government. That is why he spoke out to condemn the decision and is working with Congress on a legislative response."
  1. groups:
    Community,   US Politics,   Progressive America,   Current Democrats,   2 more
  2. tags:
    Obama,  Campaign Finance,  Corruption government,  Gibbs,  1 more
  3. recommended by:
    WakeUpPeople
  4.     
    |

45 comments // Gibbs Fires Back At Chief Justice Roberts Over Obama Criticism

  • crystalman
  • BIGDADDYMELVIN
  • medHead
  • Incredulous
    • 0
      Incredulous  

    • Oh hey, news flash Roberts...the American public finds your recent tool of a pro-corporate decision VERY TROUBLING. If we could, we would line up with rotten vegetables and communicate directly with you on how troubling we find that decision.

    • 1 year ago
  • tommic
    • 0
      tommic  

    • Pretty comicial Justice Roberts calling anything political when the Supreme Court stopped the vote recount in Flordia in the 2000 election led by the Supreme Court Justice William Reinquest that appointed George W Bush President. Maybe its time we remove any options for the Supreme Court to be political. Simply by nominating only independents to the court. They may lean a little right or left but right now Scalia, Thomas, Roberts, Alito are hard right conservatives who are without moral compass. Left wingers are usually a little nutty but at least they do have a sense of justice for all. Centrists are they way to go at the Supreme Court.

    • 1 year ago
  • ryan8566
  • BarrytheblessedSocialist
  • Conniepae
  • cmdinc
  • Conniepae
    • 0
      Conniepae  
    • cmdinc:

      In your humble opinion? Sorry, I support unions and disagree. Repeating the 'talking points' of corporations, doesn't make it true. Ask the workers who are in unions.

    • 1 year ago
  • cmdinc
  • Conniepae
    • 0
      Conniepae  
    • cmdinc:

      Well to be honest, 'humble' was a joke. I have read your comments and humble is not a word I would honestly use to describe you. Probably another thing we disagree about. I think 'humble' is a sign of good character.

    • 1 year ago
  • tommic
    • 0
      tommic  
    • BarrytheblessedSocialist:

      Complaining about unions? Unions brought middle class America to where it was in the 1960's and 1970's. Organized crime infiltrated union pension funds and then union leadership, or the other way around and ruined the reputation of unions forever. Unions by in large are good for society as we have all witnessed the utter contempt for moral rightness with corporate greed run amok. Unions should be expanded not reduced. Power to the people not the small number of elite CEO's and CFO's that rape the capitalist system for everything they can. Wake up and smell the coffee because right now it smells like shit.

    • 1 year ago
  • oppressed1
    • 0
      oppressed1  
    • Conniepae:

      Your confusing the unions that helped bring american workers into the middle class 60 years ago. Unions today have destroyed entire companies, and have been infiltrated by people who have money in the intrest of themselves instead of for the workers.

    • 1 year ago
  • tommic
    • 0
      tommic  
    • oppressed1:

      Unions didn't destroy anything corrupt leaders of unions destroyed unions. Higher wages and medical benefits didn't destroy them either. The pension funds of unions got stolen, perverted, or misused at the expense of the average union worker. Thats what destroyed unions.

    • 1 year ago
  • BrushwithDeathToothpaste
    • 0
      BrushwithDeathToothpaste  

    • This is not unprecedented. Other presidents have called out the Supreme Court in the past during the State of the Union Address.

      Such thin skin. I would expect my Justices to whine less. Especially since the ruling was not unanimous and clearly gave big corporations too much influence.

      Interesting coming from people with lifetime jobs, health care and pensions that do not require reelection.

    • 1 year ago
  • courage
  • Conniepae
    • +2
      Conniepae  
    • courage:

      I would imagine George W. was the first President to reference a forged document in the State of the Union to take us into a pre-emptive war with a country, which had not killed one American and was not openly threatening us.

      President Obama said what needed to be said. He didn't have to count on mainstream media for his comments to be heard, he had the ears of the nation. He wasn't lying. In America 'money talks'. Corporations should not have a louder voice than 'We the People'.

      The insurance companies are spending the premiums we are paying, to spin their political views. My insurance premiums should pay for my health care, not the political views of their CEO's. Our premiums and deductibles are going up, while our health care is not. That isn't happening by accident. They know they can do what they want, they have our premiums to spend as they wish. Sad, sad, sad!

    • 1 year ago
  • ryan8566
  • wayseeker
  • courage
    • -1
      courage  

    • funny the only special interests obama cares about are his trial lawyers and his union stormtroopers. The goverment is slowly destroying the private sector shouldnt business people be aloud to try and defend themselves before every thing in this country is owned by the goverment.Save capitalism deport a liberal

    • 1 year ago
  • jayrye
    • +1
      jayrye  
    • courage:

      That's funny. Seemed to me the private sector did a good job destroying itself prior to Obama's election. Excuse him for trying to avoid a meltdown like we had in 2008.

    • 1 year ago
  • courage
    • 0
      courage  

    • Chicago thug politics welcome to the white house did'nt you feel a little dirty when obama attacked the court and his party cronies shouted and jeered at the justices sad whats next the joint chiefs being attacked by schumer and pelosi which would be funny those old war horses would kick them national socialist party hacks all around the room.

    • 1 year ago
  • derk
    • +4
      derk  

    • This has nothing to do with President Obama.

      This is solely about the Supreme Court selling out our nation to the highest bidder.

    • 1 year ago
  • cmdinc
    • 0
      cmdinc  
    • derk:

      well... President Obama disrespected another branch of our government...The Branch that has to interpert the crap that is thrown out...lets say on a hurried vote on Christmas Eve... get real and understand the job of the Supreme Court

    • 1 year ago
  • oppressed1
    • -4
      oppressed1  

    • Obama is commited to reduce the influence of special intrest. HAHA, who the fuck does this guy think we are. AFter talking a big game Obam put lobbyist into positions of his administration. His contributors were the same people he says he is trying to destroy. Who do you think gave you your money mr president? Not the stoners who can barely afford a dime bag.

      Though i disagree with the court ruling obama was a dick in calling out the justices at his political pep rally that used to be called the state of the union. It just further proves hes an asshole with sinister intentions.

    • 1 year ago
  • WakeUpPeople
  • Sexirobot
    • +2
      Sexirobot  
    • oppressed1:

      oppressed1's impeccable logic

      Obama = Bad
      Disagreeing with court ruling = Good

      Obama disagreeing with court ruling = bad...good..err..err..asshole with sinister intentions.

    • 1 year ago
  • snarly
  • oppressed1
    • 0
      oppressed1  
    • Sexirobot:

      obama= asshole for calling out the justices

      obama= not an asshole for thinking coorporations should be able to spend what ever they want.

      What i should i stated was that the justices dont have to be there. They come to support the other branches of the government, and to be called out like that on live tv goes against any sort of honorablity that i thought obama might still have.

      If i wasnt in the army i would have an oz on me at all times btw

    • 1 year ago
  • Conniepae
    • +4
      Conniepae  
    • oppressed1:

      Poor Supreme Court Justices, someone said something they didn't like, in front of America. They still get to go home to their gated community, complete with good pay, health care and the good life. Sucks to be them? Not!

      Sorry, I have no sympathy for the pampered group of 9. They have lifetime jobs, they don't have to worry about the consequences of their actions. We do!

    • 1 year ago
  • jayrye
    • 0
      jayrye  
    • oppressed1:

      Why is he an asshole for calling out the justices? He gets called out by everybody for doing a piss poor job, so should they. If you can't handle it, maybe you shouldn't be making those type of decisions that can so greatly affect us.

    • 1 year ago
  • ryan8566
  • Conniepae
    • +3
      Conniepae  

    • Kudos to Gibbs -- Give it back, don't just roll over to the Supreme's gone wild.

      Justice Robert's lied to Congress. He said he was not out to change long standing precidences. He has done the exact opposite of what he told them he planned to do. He has turned the Supreme's into an activist court.

    • 1 year ago
  • cmdinc
  • Conniepae
    • +3
      Conniepae  
    • cmdinc:

      Gibbs is the spokesperson for the White House. It's not Gibbs vs anyone. He is just stating fact. The Congress must act to change the law, which enabled them to make that ruling. Even if they were not politically motivated, things must change. Corporations will be spending 'our money' on politics, not product and service.

      Look how much money was spent on the last campaign. That money came from somewhere. It came from us in the form of higher prices. If corporation were not spending money on politics, we could afford to purchase their products, keep companies operating and people employed. Every political donation is either taking away from the consumer, or the worker. That's you and me.

    • 1 year ago
  • wayseeker
  • kennymotown
    • +10
      kennymotown  

    • Justice Roberts needs to be kicked off the bench! It can be done and it's not called impeaching. It is a process that the Congress can just have him removed for doing harm from his position on the bench. Goddamn it, I am sick of these people grow a set of balls and kick a couple of these fucking corporatist off the court would you please.

    • 1 year ago
  • jeffissleeping
  • kennymotown
  • cmdinc
    • 0
      cmdinc  
    • kennymotown:

      easy my friend. Let me ask this...If the supreme court had a press release and proclaimed Obama is a idiot...what would happen?? i have disagreed with the "court" a time or two, but they only interpret what the congress gives to them...the true bitch should be with congress. pass laws that are understood and without interpertation

    • 1 year ago
  • jayrye
    • 0
      jayrye  
    • cmdinc:

      Agreed. Why the hell hasn't Congress circumvented this ruling already if they truly represent the people? My guess (hardly a guess) is that they first and foremost represent the money, whether it be people, corporations, what have you. There is no way to purge it. The USSC just basically gave validation to the practice common practice. That's it. Don't expect much to change unless you held a gun to their heads.

    • 1 year ago
  • ryan8566
  • kennymotown
more from Community:
from the community

top videos