|
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 4,899
Hard-core CEG'er
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 4,899 |
Originally posted by RT and his SE:
Packrat: Pot or kettle, which one do you want to be?
Neither, I'm not complaining about your complaining, I was just pointing out the obvious.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 1,710
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 1,710 |
Well of course the dems aren't going to like a conservative nominee. I almost feel bad for them. The Supreme Court is the only thing they have left to advance their views. They can't win an election these days and so it has been the last place they have left to advance their agenda and now even that is being taken away. So no, i can't say I'm surprised if they completely lambast this nominee. However, its not going to get them very far. Bush can get pretty much whoever he wants into this open seat, and he proved that by nominating a conservative guy like this.
Edit : To make it clear, i havent heard an trash talking from the left yet on this guy. Only from moveon.org, who's sole existance is to opposose anything Bush does.
Last edited by Corbett; 07/20/05 05:49 PM.
- Tim
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,489
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,489 |
i don't know much about this roberts guy, so i'll reserve judgement pending more research.
however i would like to know what those sneaky "Lefties" are making up. lol.
'03 Saab 9-5 Aero
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 6,198
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 6,198 |
Originally posted by Corbett:
Bush can get pretty much whoever he wants into this open seat, and he proved that by nominating a conservative guy like this.
I wish that was true. I wouldn't consider it much of a victory if we get someone whom no one knows about in there. I'll start planning a parade once we get another Scalia or Thomas in there.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 1,710
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 1,710 |
I dont care if nobody knows who he is. If he is a strict constructionist and a conservative, thats fine enough for me. I'd love to see Rowe vs Wade overturned eventually. 
- Tim
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 6,198
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 6,198 |
That's just it -- nobody knows what he is. And the fact that Republican Senators think he's great does not make my heart content. They said the same thing about 2-3 other judges that have turned out to be complete disappointments.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 3,290
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 3,290 |
Originally posted by Corbett:
I'd love to see Rowe vs Wade overturned
FWIW Roberts has said that nothing in his personal belief system would cause him to ignore the precedent set by Rowe vs. Wade. In other words, he considers the ruling as it is to be the precedent. Whether he chooses to stick by this statement or turn away from it and "legislate from the bench" as the neocons like to say remains to be seen.
E0 #36
'95 Ranger
'82 Honda CX500
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 1,710
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 1,710 |
He said that as a judge who was under the supreme court, not IN the supreme court. Being under the supreme court left him with no choice since the supreme court had already ruled. So in theory, he could vote to overturn it as a supreme court judge, if it came to it.
- Tim
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 1,469
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 1,469 |
Originally posted by caltour:
In a previous thread, I said that very few criminals in history have caused more harm to more people that Bernard Ebbers (head cheese of WorldCom, recently convicted of defrauding thousands of investors of over $11 billion).
Davo replied by saying that I was ignorant of history.
I said OK, Davo, tell us which white collar criminals in modern history have caused more harm to more people than Ebbers.
Davo never named any. He only named Hilter, Stalin and Pol Pot.
Here's the point, Davo: Even if you want to include the bloodthirsty dictators of history (not a good idea, since Hitler's and Stalin's atrocities were not violations of criminal law, and they were never convicted of any crime), there are still only a few . So what do you think I should retract?
Ian't it amazing that Davo is arguing that Ebbers' crime was not really that bad and his 25 year sentence was too harsh? The guy ripped off $11 BILLION, for christsake, and destroyed thousands of people's jobs. He wiped out a lot of people's life savings.
The right-wing used to stand for law and order. But now, apparently, it stands for leniency for corporate crime.
You guy's forgot Saddam..he's a big baddy, he is going to trial and I bet he gets a taste of some "right wing law and order"..
Ebbers = got what he deserved..and under a right winger.
1999 Amazon Green SVT Contour (#554/2760)
"People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they seldom use."
-Soren Kierkegaard (as posted by Jato)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 6,198
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 6,198 |
Originally posted by Viss1:
FWIW Roberts has said that nothing in his personal belief system would cause him to ignore the precedent set by Rowe vs. Wade. In other words, he considers the ruling as it is to be the precedent. Whether he chooses to stick by this statement or turn away from it and "legislate from the bench" as the neocons like to say remains to be seen.
If that's his view, it's quite unfortunate.
'Legislating from the bench' is a term that has been used to describe the judicial practices of activist judges for quite some time, even before the invasion of the 'neocons'. So although neocons may use the term, you should make it clear when you mention its use that it is not something exclusive to neocons. Whatever point you may have is diminished in your poor attempt at labeling the neocons as some kind of kook group.
|
|
|
|
|
