Destino Posted January 13, 2006 Share Posted January 13, 2006 AND NOBODY that could pass your test Destino would be fit to rule over anything .Right, we are MUCH better off with people that need to hide things in order to get in..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted January 13, 2006 Share Posted January 13, 2006 Nobody would really care if Planned Parenthood wasn't afraid of losing their golden egg umm...I mean helping people.Actually I think it's the exact opposite. I think this abortion crap has allowed a lot of really important issues to go without as much attention as they would otherwise get. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevenaa Posted January 13, 2006 Share Posted January 13, 2006 It can't be stopped. This was going to happen.What confuses and scares me is that for the Right to have this kind of power, one of two things have to be the case; either the American people are dumb enough to be duped into electing these people, or they actually agree with them. Either way it's frightening. America's foundation, freedom, is crumbling under the weight of the neo-liberal conservative behemoth. The conservatives are expanding the government's rights and boundaries without any regard for why those boundaries were there to begin with. When the hell did conservatives start favoring big government? WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH THIS COUNTRY??!??!? So you've taken time to review his cases so that you could come to this informed conclusion? Please cite some examples from your research. And put them in the context of the job he was performing at the time, be it a judge or a lawyer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zguy28 Posted January 13, 2006 Share Posted January 13, 2006 Actually I think it's the exact opposite. I think this abortion crap has allowed a lot of really important issues to go without as much attention as they would otherwise get. I absolutely agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chopper Dave Posted January 13, 2006 Share Posted January 13, 2006 So you've taken time to review his cases so that you could come to this informed conclusion? Please cite some examples from your research. And put them in the context of the job he was performing at the time, be it a judge or a lawyer. It was more of a blanket statement indicting the state of the country as a whole. This is just a part of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Punani2 Posted January 13, 2006 Share Posted January 13, 2006 Signed into law by BC. Broadly expanding the Governments wiretapping capabilities. http://www.askcalea.net/ Guess we had similar apathy in 1994. oops!!! :laugh: @ dems Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted January 13, 2006 Share Posted January 13, 2006 Signed into law by BC. Broadly expanding the Governments wiretapping capabilities. http://www.askcalea.net/ Guess we had similar apathy in 1994. Except for the part where Bush didn't comply with that law, even as broad and lenient as it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EersSkins05 Posted January 13, 2006 Share Posted January 13, 2006 ^^^^^^ Bingo. There's quite a sizeable difference between a) legally expanding the government's authority to "conduct lawfully-authorized electronic surveillance while preserving public safety, the public's right to privacy, and the telecommunications industry's competitiveness" through legislation passed by Congress and signed by the chief executive, and bypassing those pesky "warrants" needed to conduct such surveillance (despite the existence of a classified information court that could and would authorize such searches upon just cause without divulging any information to the suspects) and merely excuting such surveilance without the proper authorization from the judicial branch and in a manner that is beyond the scope of the authority granted to the chief executive by the legislative branch. Until that difference becomes clear, you're not grasping the seriousness of the issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Air Force Cane Posted January 13, 2006 Share Posted January 13, 2006 chopper Dave: "neo-liberal conservative behemoth" wow- that sounds SO SCARY!! where do you guys go to make all this up? Is there some cool club that comes up with "neo-con" and "proto-zionist" and "right wing cabal"? and yes- you are indeed faced with two very bad choices. my guess is that the American people really are majority Republican. maybe the fact that IN ELECTIONS the GOP has won majorities in the House, Senate, Governorships and 6 of the last 8 Presidential elections could tip you off on that one.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Air Force Cane Posted January 13, 2006 Share Posted January 13, 2006 No, Turley is not an ultra-liberal. He in fact has some Madisonian principles to which he adheres. He just should have been a Senator- as he is as pompous and bloviating as Schumer and Biden. I mean, Alito has accomplished more than Turley by working with the White House, being an Appellate Judge for 15 years, and now soon to be Associate Justice on the SCOTUS. Turley is a professor at a top 20 law school where by dint of geography he can appear on TV and to the other poster- is there some part of the UCMJ or CivPro Rules that state an attorney can't rake libs over the coals? :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
webnarc Posted January 13, 2006 Share Posted January 13, 2006 and to the other poster- is there some part of the UCMJ or CivPro Rules that state an attorney can't rake libs over the coals? None what so ever. You're just pretty smart so I figured you were liberally minded. But everyone is fallible I suppose . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted January 13, 2006 Share Posted January 13, 2006 No, Turley is not an ultra-liberal.He in fact has some Madisonian principles to which he adheres. He just should have been a Senator- as he is as pompous and bloviating as Schumer and Biden. I mean, Alito has accomplished more than Turley by working with the White House, being an Appellate Judge for 15 years, and now soon to be Associate Justice on the SCOTUS. I was just wondering if his disagreement with Alito was based on ideological/political partisanship. Being a blowhard is just part of the law professor resume after all! :laugh: (Michigan Law 1988) Of course, remember that the fact that one has accomplished something does not mean that they are above scrutiny or criticism. After all, Ted Kennedy has been a United States Senator for a long time, yet you and your frineds have no trouble finding fault there Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Tater Posted January 13, 2006 Share Posted January 13, 2006 Genuine leftist have allowed themselves to be corrupted or marginalized. Most of what I've read about Alito (I'll admit its stuff generated at the VC blog) he's the best we're going to get (and much better than anybody the demopubs would pick). He aligns a bit idealistically with Thomas but is also more of a judicial conservative which should keep the pro-Roe v. Wade people happy (and will PO those who don't like Roe v. Wade). It is his judicial conservatism that has lead him to support a more pro-government position. This is better than a leftist who is also a judicial conservative and much better than a leftist who is a judicial activist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarge Posted January 13, 2006 Share Posted January 13, 2006 Too bad all the Dems got out of all this posturing is to make themselves look like asses:) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EersSkins05 Posted January 14, 2006 Share Posted January 14, 2006 Too bad all the Dems got out of all this posturing is to make themselves look like asses:) Seriously... it's all posturing. Both sides. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chomerics Posted January 14, 2006 Share Posted January 14, 2006 I love the fact that the libs tried to stop Alito but are powerless to do it.. I am glad you have shown your true feelings and support for a fascist authoritorian regime as well as your disdain for our constitution in the above post. At least we know where you stand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarge Posted January 14, 2006 Share Posted January 14, 2006 I am glad you have shown your true feelings and support for a fascist authoritorian regime as well as your disdain for our constitution in the above post. At least we know where you stand. That's what happens when a party panders to the whacked out views of hippies, commies and other losers. THey get voted into the MINORITY Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.