Yesterday it was President Obama's lead pollster employing a straw man fallacy to argue with the American people over Obamacare. Today it was two of the president's top advisers who were sent onto the Sunday morning talk shows to use the same strategy against the Chief Justice of the United States.

Continued...

This embarrassing, third-world style dust-up between two branches of government (with the third cheering one branch on like a bunch of drunken soccer fans) began during the president's State of the Union Address in January. Referring to a recent Supreme Court ruling, President Obama said, "With all due deference to the separation of powers, the Supreme Court reversed a century of law to open the floodgates for special interests - including foreign corporations - to spend without limit in our elections." (source)

The next chapter came when Chief Justice John Roberts, speaking to law students at the University of Alabama, acknowledged that anyone is free to criticize Supreme Court rulings but said, "There is the issue of the setting, the circumstances and the decorum. The image of having the members of one branch of government standing up, literally surrounding the Supreme Court, cheering and hollering while the court - according the requirements of protocol - has to sit there expressionless, I think is very troubling." Chief Justice Roberts also said that the president's annual address has "degenerated into a political pep rally." (source)

When asked immediately after the chief justice's comments to respond, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs ignored the substance of those remarks entirely and took the opportunity to attack the Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission ruling again though this time leaving out the glaring falsehoods in the president's statement. "What is troubling," Gibbs said, "is that this decision opened the floodgates for corporations and special interests to pour money into elections - drowning out the voices of average Americans."

This brings us to this morning's chapter in the saga which makes Mr. Obama and his accomplices appear more and more like a tin horn dictator than the president of the United States of America. When given another chance to respond to Chief Justice Roberts' comments on the inappropriate setting the president chose to criticize the court and the degeneration of the State of the Union address under this president, Mr. Gibbs claimed interest groups will increase their influence because of the ruling and Senior White House Advisor David Axelrod said the decision is a threat to democracy. (source)

Remember that use of the straw man fallacy means one ignores a person's actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented version of that position. Having no valid argument with which to defend President Obama and his fellow Democrats for turning the State of the Union address into a political pep rally, his minions simply ignore that accusation and act as if the chief justice took exception to something else entirely.

This is one of the last available strategies to a side that has lost all legitimate hope of winning a debate. It is common among dictators and puppet leaders who cannot defend their failed policies to a citizenry that has become wise to their failures. And it is now being employed by the Obama machine virtually every day.