Obama’s Campaign against Supreme Court – Seen as Risky by Some – How This Ruling will Help the GOP, Public Opinion and a One Issues Opponent.

Is this what Obama has left to Campaign On? photo's Telegraph UK and magnificentbastard.com

Just last week, President Obama questioned the authority of the Super Court, as the Court heard arguments on whether or not to find the President’s Health Care Bill unconstitutional. The fact that it appeared as if the court was not exactly on the side of the Administration in the first three days, and the horrid and stumbling presentation by the Administrations lawyer, it was, as reported an indication that the Court would, in all likelihood, strike down the law as unconstitutional – which is their job. The law itself, is not widely supported by the general public – polling data shows that support for the bill is lacking 46% strongly oppose the Act, while support for the act is at 36%(WTSP). In fact, the decision to even vote on the bill brought about a series of contentious town hall meetings, and demonstrations that apparently have been forgotten, or more to the point ignored, it was after-all only the Tea Party. That same Tea Party was responsible, in part, for huge Democrat losses in the house in 2010, and it was fueled by the public’s desire to get rid of “Obama care.”

Now, the President has decided, since that is the only legislation that he can claim as a ‘legacy” to his Presidency, that he is going to fight back like a Conservative – He’s suggesting that the court refrain from being “judicial activists” by adhering to the Constitution. Granted that’s a somewhat simple explanation of the President’s issue with the Court – more to the Point, he has warned the Court to uphold his law, as they are not elected, and in an obvious attempt at goading the Court into upholding the law, he took them to task over remarks in the initial hearings. The Court will decide sometime between now and June 24th.

According to reports, the President may have taken a risk on this one, as voters see the Court in a more favorable light than other institution – say Congress, the Senate and yes, the Office of the President (Bloomberg). In a series of polls by a variety of pollsters, finds a shift in the public’s view of the courts, specifically during the period of 2008-2010 and 2010 forward – in that period, the support for the Court to follow the Constitution rather than use it as a guideline for legislating from the bench, has risen.

Which may be why the White House is now under “damage control” according to Reuters News Service, the spin on this one, is that the President “"did not mean and did not suggest that ... it would be unprecedented for the court to rule that a law was unconstitutional. That's what the Supreme Court is there to do," Carney said.” (Reuters)

Obviously, the White House is counting on a nation that does not watch the news, read the news or otherwise, go online – It was obvious he was warning the Court not to be activist and not to follow the Constitution, rather defer to Congress. He apparently ignored the whole Separation of Powers suggested by the Framers of the Constitution and something every student of the nation should understand, never mind a Harvard Law School Grad.

This smacks of desperation – however, it may, in the end, be a good thing for Obama if the Bill is found to be invalid by the Court – otherwise, he runs the risk of having to campaign on Health Care Reform, which is not overly popular (see polling), That said, the whole Health Care Bill fiasco aside, the President then would have to run on his Economic, Foreign Policy and Domestic Policy performance, where he a) cannot blame Bush, although he will try, cannot blame Congress (he already tried that – see 2010), and will have to stand on his own record. No matter how the media and the White House are going to attempt to spin and re-write very recent history, the facts are there, and the footage available to run in campaign ads opposing Obama’s re-election. In April, the price of gasoline at the pump continues to rise, and as a resultfood is now costing more (inflation) and that affects not only the “very rich”, or the “middle class” but those who’s EBT cards can no longer keep up with the rising costs of food. As the unemployment rate is steady at 8 to 9% depending on the month and the reporting, and not including underemployment nor those who have simply given up looking for work and no longer have benefits available – the aforementioned immediate misery of the general public is palpable. If one thinks they are going to blame George Bush, think again. It might be worth a shot, but the former President has not been in the driver’s seat, so to speak for the past four years, and the proverbial “buck” stops in Obama’s office.

With “Obama-Care” off the table, it also removes the onus of “Romney-Care” from the campaign, giving the former Governor of the State of Massachusetts, and Businessman Mitt Romney, a break – he has the tools that he needs to make a distinction between the way he managed Massachusetts (by working with the Democrats in the State Legislature and Senate (there really was no choice, as he was vastly outnumbered), and balanced the budget, and so on and so on – the debate, should Obama be competitive, would have to fall on questions more mundane: like the cut of the two contenders jean’s - which one might “wear it better”? (See UK Article Obama Jeans vs. Gordon-Brown Chinos’.

Seriously, those are the type of questions most American’s want to know – not: how are you planning to get us the heck out of this mess? What if, however, most American’s really want to know who is going to stop the insanity, which one of the two men at the podium (assuming it is Romney) would be best equipped to get the jobs back into the nation, cut down the inflation, and pump up private industry in order to move the nation forward? One has to understand that government money does not come from the government, and there is only a finite number of “rich people” left to support Obama’s programs, whhile the so-called middle class is being forced in to the lower classes, and the lower classes see no way out – it comes down to the question of “Who is going to help me put food on my table?” – With four years to prove himself in that regarded, the President has spent his time crafting a piece of legislation that, upon review, could be dismantled in a heartbeat – one can best the house, the Administration never thought it would be heard by the Supreme Court this soon, and now, the Campaign must find a new angle. Any suggestions?