There are so many lies packed into his statement that it’s difficult to figure out where to begin.

Via Fox News:

President Obama, employing his strongest language to date on the Supreme Court review of the federal health care overhaul, cautioned the court Monday against overturning the law — while repeatedly saying he’s “confident” it will be upheld. 
The president spoke at length about the case at a joint press conference with the leaders of Mexico and Canada. The president, adopting what he described as the language of conservatives who fret about judicial activism, questioned how an “unelected group of people” could overturn a law approved by Congress. 
“I’m confident that the Supreme Court will not take what would be an unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress,” Obama said. 

Lie #1:  Obama doesn’t understand how an ‘unelected group of people’ could overturn a law.

Obama is a media-framed Constitutional expert, so his not understanding the basic system of checks and balances seems unlikely.  Just in case he’s a little foggy on the topic (after all, he hasn’t exactly attempted to heed the Constitution much since his days at Harvard), Mitt Romney explains:

“What the president’s complaining about, however, is that the Supreme Court might actually apply the Constitution to the bill that he passed! And the whole purpose of the Supreme Court is to make sure that Congress does not pass laws that are in violation of the Constitution.”

Lie #2:  The healthcare law was passed by a strong majority.

Even the Atlanta Journal Constitution is calling BS on this claim.  The healthcare bill had to be passed using trickery such as reconciliation and backroom deals. In the end, it still only passed the House by a vote of 219-212, and had to be rammed through Congress using a budget reconciliation maneuver that allowed it to bypass a Senate filibuster with just 51 votes.

Lie #3:  Overturning the law would be ‘extraordinary’ and ‘unprecedented’.

Doug Ross explains that this has only happened, well… over 1,300 times.

If find it curious that a self-professed Constitutional scholar doesn’t know that the Supreme Court has struck down more than 1,300 laws since the founding of the Republic.
• Unprecedented step of overturning a law? Oh, gee, Mr. Constitutional Scholar, as of 2002, the Supreme Court had only struck 1,315 laws down as unconstitutional, the first in 1803.

Does the arrogance of this President know no bounds?

For you drones and irregular Americans following along, that’s a rhetorical question.

So the smartest man in the room doesn’t understand basic laws, and the definition of the words ‘unprecedented’, and ‘majority’.

Not to mention the word ‘Constitution’.

Alexa Shrugged adds:

As many have pointed out, this is a laughably unprecedented and extraordinary definition of the words “unprecedented” and “extraordinary.”  It’s as if President Obama thinks the Supreme Court has never struck down a law before!  Or that Congress has never passed an unconstitutional law in its history! 

After his Solicitor General got terrible reviews for his oral arguments, which some think put the case in jeopardy, Obama is trying to reframe the debate in case he loses.  If Obamacare goes down, Obama wants you to think it is because of an activist, extreme Supreme Court – not because the law itself is an unconstitutional federal intrusion into your life.