JMS Posted May 26, 2009 Share Posted May 26, 2009 I'm all for strict constructionists no matter which way they lean. Understanding the limits placed on the Government is key. You want folks who will roll back the clock to 1880's, got cha....... I love it how when Scallia tries to rewrite rescent law which the GOP favor he's good, but when a liberal even hints at overturning the status que they are "activists".... The supreme court is there to overturn laws. They are there to ensure that the constitution remains the highest law of the land and is not over written by lower court rullings or even state or federal legislatures. And yes they are their to interpret. To use their brains and life experiences to guide them. The constitution is in fact a living document and is interpretted by both sides of the political spectrum for their own ends. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tulane Skins Fan Posted May 26, 2009 Share Posted May 26, 2009 I'm all for strict constructionists no matter which way they lean. Understanding the limits placed on the Government is key. Strict constructionism does not always equate with limiting government power. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted May 26, 2009 Share Posted May 26, 2009 But to take this COMPLETELY TRUE statement by Sotomeyer about making policy and twist it into advocacy of judicial activism, that is a buncha bull. Which does not, of course, mean that it won't be done. :dance: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted May 26, 2009 Share Posted May 26, 2009 C'mon Predicto, everyone loves strict construction when it produces the result they believe is right, and they want activism when THAT produces the result they want. I think folks reaction to the Kelo decision would be a great example of that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted May 26, 2009 Share Posted May 26, 2009 See, bait and switch here. This is the tailgate. We speak of no such things here. Ah, backpedaling already. Attempting to rewrite/respin your posting history So far, statistical evidence in the Stadium suggests you are wrong wrong WRONG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popeman38 Posted May 26, 2009 Share Posted May 26, 2009 Ah, backpedaling already. Attempting to rewrite/respin your posting history So far, statistical evidence in the Stadium suggests you are wrong wrong WRONG See, now I know you are lying. There is no way to conduct statistical analysis in the stadium at any time. As soon as a sampling was completed it would be nullified by another topic. Your results would consist of only outliers! :evilg: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted May 26, 2009 Share Posted May 26, 2009 By electing a liberal latino judge, Obama is making it very uncomfortable for the GOP. If they go all out and filibuster her, it potentially puts them at odds with arguable their most important constituency not yet firmly in their grasp. If they don't, Obama get's what he wants and he still get's to say to the latino's Look what I did for you!!,,, Have the Republicans given you a supreme court seat. Odd...I know I have heard that argument before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted May 26, 2009 Share Posted May 26, 2009 I think it's 26 in agreement with the statements in the opening posts and zero disagreements. Well, above your fifty percent... You fail at making accurate blanket statements and overgeneralizations!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMS Posted May 26, 2009 Share Posted May 26, 2009 But to take this COMPLETELY TRUE statement by Sotomeyer about making policy and twist it into advocacy of judicial activism, that is a buncha bull. I have new evidence. Evidently it's true, she's not only intellectually deficient, she's not popular on the federal bench with prosecutors or other judges, and she's a bully. I just watched a FOX news correspondent who says Ms. Sotomayor actually corrected the spelling and grammer on other federal judges rullings in red pen and sent it back to them... and then they said she wasn't very smart too... Looks like we'll all have to re-evaluate our positions on this one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
karmacop Posted May 26, 2009 Share Posted May 26, 2009 I just watched a FOX news correspondent.... Well, if it was on Fox then it must be true... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldskool Posted May 26, 2009 Share Posted May 26, 2009 Well, if it was on Fox then it must be true... Blanket idiotic statements like this are bad for the goose and the gander. :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
karmacop Posted May 26, 2009 Share Posted May 26, 2009 Blanket idiotic statements like this are bad for the goose and the gander. :doh: Fox is right-wing propaganda. Period. I don't consider it "news" at all. Unless and until verified by an actual news-reporting outfit that doesn't have such a clear slant to their "reporting," I think a heavy dose of skepticism is warranted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madison Redskin Posted May 26, 2009 Share Posted May 26, 2009 Even "white" members of the Court, like Scalia and Alito, are pretty proud of their own heritages. I think some level of race-consciousness is a very healthy thing. Being grounded in a particular culture can be an important foundation for success. It shouldn't be something to run away from. Exactly. Celebrating your Italian or "Kiss me I'm Irish" heritage is fine, but celebrating your Latino roots is somehow divise and inappropriate (e.g., people get their panties in a twist when people fly Mexican flags in the U.S., but don't seem to take issue with those flying European flags). As for this particular nominee, she sounds fine so far, but I'm reserving judgment until I find out more about her. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted May 26, 2009 Share Posted May 26, 2009 I just listened to Sean Hannity talk about her. Apparently, she is a combination of Karl Marx and Bill Ayers, with a little Pancho Villa thrown in for seasoning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greenspandan Posted May 26, 2009 Share Posted May 26, 2009 i am so glad that the republicans and its PR wing (aka Fox News) still haven't learned the fundamental lesson that if you loudly protest every single move the guy makes, even the pretty reasonable ones, you lose the ear of the american people at large. you guys would be better off if you picked your battles rather than toting out the same tired rhetoric every day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smoot Point Really Posted May 26, 2009 Share Posted May 26, 2009 I'm interested in learning more about her... Haven't had time to research it yet, but overall I think it could've been a lot worse... I guess we'll eventually have to find out if she has any pubes in her closet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumbo Posted May 26, 2009 Share Posted May 26, 2009 I don't need to know anything about her to know I'm against her. And not just because of her ethnicity. She's also female thus subject to hormonal issues when thinking and probably an anti-life liberal if The Savior likes her. <The preceding was a paid commentary and does not necessarily reflect the views of the account holder. Paypal welcome.> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted May 26, 2009 Share Posted May 26, 2009 i am so glad that the republicans and its PR wing (aka Fox News) still haven't learned the fundamental lesson that if you loudly protest every single move the guy makes, even the pretty reasonable ones, you lose the ear of the american people at large. you guys would be better off if you picked your battles rather than toting out the same tired rhetoric every day. Remember how Obama was the most liberal member of the Senate? Sotomeyer is about to become the most liberal member of the federal bench. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aREDSKIN Posted May 26, 2009 Share Posted May 26, 2009 Fox is right-wing propaganda. Period. I don't consider it "news" at all. Unless and until verified by an actual news-reporting outfit that doesn't have such a clear slant to their "reporting," I think a heavy dose of skepticism is warranted. Please inform us of "an actual new-reporting outfit that doesn't have such a clear slant to their 'reporting,' " you refer too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aREDSKIN Posted May 26, 2009 Share Posted May 26, 2009 Remember how Obama was the most liberal member of the Senate?Sotomeyer is about to become the most liberal member of the federal bench. 1st is demonstrably true and the second remains yet to be demonstrated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
karmacop Posted May 26, 2009 Share Posted May 26, 2009 Please inform us of "an actual new-reporting outfit that doesn't have such a clear slant to their 'reporting,' " you refer too. Almost any network other than Fox, which is essentially now just a propoganda wing of the GOP. Fox even published GOP talking points as their own a while back, with the same spelling mistakes. No rational person can claim that the "news" they get from Fox isn't seriously slanted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
karmacop Posted May 26, 2009 Share Posted May 26, 2009 1st is demonstrably true. Totally false. Several objective (note the emphasis) published studies showed that Obama was nowhere close to the most liberal voting member of the Senate during his tenure. My recollection is that he fell in the 10-15 range, but not the "most" liberal member at all. BTW, the National Journal, which said he was the most liberal Senator for 2007, doesn't count as an objective source in this respect because their methodology is flawed. They only look at a single year of voting at a time, and Obama's one-off 2007 ranking was skewed by him missing 1/3 of those votes. For 2005 and 2006, the same magazine ranked him 16th and 10th, respectively. Just cutting off a potential argument from the start. Edited to add a study showing Obama to be the 12th most liberal Senator for 2007-2008: http://voteview.ucsd.edu/sen110.htm And the 21st most liberal Senator for 2005-2006: http://voteview.ucsd.edu/sen109.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Special K Posted May 26, 2009 Share Posted May 26, 2009 Wait, isn't this the judge who's had 6 cases she's been involved in go to the Supreme Court with 5 of those cases being overturned? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted May 26, 2009 Share Posted May 26, 2009 Wait, isn't this the judge who's had 6 cases she's been involved in go to the Supreme Court with 5 of those cases being overturned? And why exactly would that be a problem? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prosperity Posted May 26, 2009 Share Posted May 26, 2009 People are so quick to form opinions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.