Gingrich Rails At Supreme Court, Obama: 'This Could Cost Us A City'

Reacting to the recent decision of the Supreme Court of the United States of America - who recently affirmed, by 5-4 decision, our Constitutional rights of due process of law, accorded by the 14th Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America - former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich came visibly unglued, and called the decision the worst since Dred Scott.

[WATCH.]

GINGRICH: I will say, I think the recent Supreme Court decision to turn over to a local district judge decisions of national security and life and death that should be made by the president and the congress is the most extraordinarily arrogant and destructive decision the Supreme Court has made in it's history.

REID: In it's history?

GINGRICH: In it's history. Worse than Dred Scott, for the following reason: The court has now knowingly stepped in, this morning's newspaper say, smugglers had actually gotten the design of a nuclear weapon, that we now have the evidence that people out there had a nuclear weapon design. And this court is saying that any random district judge, based on whatever their personal caprice is, whatever their personal ideological bias, can intervene with a terrorist in such a way.

Gingrich went on to slam Obama for supporting the decision. "The problem with Obama is that he's wrong...He applauded this court decision. This court decision is a disaster and it could cost us a city." Then Gingrich referred to district judges - all of them! - as "nutcake."

Naturally, it's Gingrich, and Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, who are nutcake, and I wonder if I can sum up why that is any better then the headline of a recent post on Jezebel: "According to Scalia, People Only Get Rights When There's Nothing At Stake." Nope! Turns out I could not have possibly said it better!

Comments

[Donnat]

But I thought that as long as it's San Francisco, Newt, none of your ilk will care about it.

I don't know why you're back in the spotlight, anyway, you're just another adulterous GOP hypocrite. Go back under your rock or wherever newts hang out.

[speakingtruth2power]

This false flag event is what the neocons expect will turn the election for them.

The more we learn of their treason, profiteering and Pak. ISI connections, the

more likely it seems that 9-11 was an evil marriage of international criminals.

[Midnightrain]

So, in other words, Gingrich is afraid that "one city" could become a terrorist hotbed ... something akin to a potential slave revolt? Wow.

Does anyone else feel deeply disgusted by this comment like I do?

[jesselee26]

my question is what kind of bold and wonderful decision the supreme court will have to make before they've cost us newt gingrich?

[Nevervotesrepublican]

Newt will keep on spewing his crap and in 23 years he will re-emerge to become PODUS and will empty our Treasury and run this country into the ground. Bad Politicians don't go away, they just wait for a more opportune time.

[dartagnan]

"Newt will keep on spewing his crap and in 23 years he will re-emerge to become PODUS"

Not very likely -- in 23 years Newt will be 85. That's just a tad elderly even by Republican standards.

[speakingtruth2power]

If these fear and loathing, warmongering fascists don't like this SCOTUS,

they surely won't like SCOTUS13 because it will set them back forty years.

[arvay]

Ha, we don't need to elect anyone to lose a city, Bush already did this to New Orleans. Will someone PLEASE hook this ADD-powered failure off stage?

[LeftHandedBrain]

"this could cost us a city"

If the vote would have gone the other way it could have cost us a country. Ours!

The constitution only works when we allow it to. The bush administration, aided by the newts of this country work so hard to take it away from us. I remember when newt showed off his contract with america and byrd, in response, pulled out his copy of the constitution. I know which one I would choose as a guideline.

If we want to keep being the shining light then we need some new batteries!

[BlackLeatherRain]

"It could cost us a city."

Why? Does Gingritch really believe the GOP is capable of intentionally allowing or encouraging another national disaster just to ensure a victory in November - a victory that would stack the courts even further for the right wing? I know people who believe that they are, but I'd like to think that while this administration is more than happy to destroy a foreign nation in the interest of money and power, they'd not do the same to an American city.

Of course, New Orleans may be the proof otherwise.

[IndependentMynd]

The Republicans wanted strict constitutionalist, didn't they? The were against 'activist' judges, right? Did they not get exactly what they asked for? Have they even peeked at the Constitution and the Bill of Rights or 'is the right to bare arms' all they know?

http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.billofrights.html
http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/index.html

[Bettysdad]

The problem is that these detainees are called "terrorists." or "Enemy Combatants."

There is no such a thing, except within Bush's White House,as an "enemy combatant. They are simply run-of-the mill criminals.

If we used the correct terminology, there would be no need for this decision.

[speakingtruth2power]

You are a criminal as well. If your blanket statement is true, then so is mine.

There are some innocent people there as well as simply, indigenous patriots.

[normathumb]

Whatever happened to..."all men are created equal"... ... "with certain unalienable rights"... Our rights have survived invasion, civil war, two world wars, Richard Nixon and a host of other challenges. It is just those rights and processes that have made us strong and worth fighting for. Is the Newt arguing that exhausting the military and the economy has made us stronger? Has whipping up international animosity made us safer and less prone to endure attack? Has all the domestic spying and the suspension of habeus corpus made people more commited to fighting for the idea of America? Seems to me our response to attack will be less robust because of our invasion of Iraq and we can thank Newt, his little Republican revolution and the whole crackpot coalition for the situation Seems to me Newt is mitigating the things that made us strong to begin with. This is the same Newt who used to argue the Democrats were too quick to commit troops overseas. the same Newt who used to argue we cannot and should not engage in nation building.

[DoomtoNeoCons]

Ah yes. The typical Neo Con tactic. Use fear as a weapon against the American people.

[ched]

If Gingrich doesn't like the decision, they must be doing something right. Surprising that they made the right call, actually, given that 7 of the 9 were appointed by Republiks.

[pbfishtaco]

That's why they're so worked up. The takeover wasn't supposed to take this long. Their people turned out not to be their people.

[naturallight]

Shame on you sir!

You have used reason, logic, and facts to support your statement.

The Reich Wing deplores your insurgent tactics.

[macintoshsauce]

LOL

[LeftHandedBrain]

How come he keeps getting interviews? I'm not nearly as stupid as he is and the MSM never asks me my opinions on these things.

[Trollstakeyourmeds]

Because he has a big mouth and refuses to shut it.

[jpcline004]

Just like Connie Chung and his mother LOL