|
Click Here to Login |
Register | Premium Upgrade | Blogs | Gallery | Arcade | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read | Log in |
![]() |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
![]() |
#21 | |
Blue Crack Addict
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,600
Local Time: 08:32 AM
|
When I started this thread, my thoughts were that it could include Court Decisions, also
__________________here is one handed down today Quote:
I think the Court did the right thing here. Once again, Alito shows he lets personal bias cloud his judgement. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#22 |
Blue Crack Addict
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 27,856
Local Time: 12:32 PM
|
^ I can't believe anyone wants to watch that sort of thing, it's beyond sick and disgusting to me. I don't care what the law is, there's no reason for that sort of thing to exist. Crush videos and fighting videos are completely depraved.
__________________updated 5:15 p.m. ET, Wed., April 21, 2010 WASHINGTON - President Barack Obama, treading carefully in the explosive arena of abortion and the Supreme Court, said Wednesday he will choose a nominee who pays heed to the rights of women and the privacy of their bodies. Yet he said he won't enforce any abortion rights "litmus tests." Obama said it is "very important to me" that his court choice take women's rights into account in interpreting the Constitution, his most expansive comments yet about how a woman's right to choose will factor into his decision. He plans to choose someone to succeed Justice John Paul Stevens within "the next couple weeks," he told CNBC. When asked if he could nominate someone who did not support a woman's right to choose, Obama said: "I am somebody who believes that women should have the ability to make often very difficult decisions about their own bodies and issues of reproduction." He said he would not judge candidates on a single-issue abortion test. "But I will say that I want somebody who is going to be interpreting our Constitution in a way that takes into account individual rights, and that includes women's rights," Obama said. "And that's going to be something that's very important to me, because I think part of what our core constitutional values promote is the notion that individuals are protected in their privacy and their bodily integrity. And women are not exempt from that." Such a detailed answer raised the question of whether Obama had, in fact, spelled out a fundamental test over abortion. The White House rejected that. "I think a litmus test is when you say, will you ask a direct question about — do you believe this? Do you believe that?" White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said. "I think the president will ask any nominee discuss how they view the Constitution and the legal principles enshrined in it." |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#23 | |
Blue Crack Addict
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,600
Local Time: 08:32 AM
|
Quote:
we don't make up laws on what we want, what is icky or not. That is what Alito, seems to do. They need to write the law properly. There is already new legislation, hopefully properly written this time, making its way through congress. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#24 | |
Blue Crack Addict
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,600
Local Time: 08:32 AM
|
Quote:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36967616...supreme_court/ http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...050903489.html http://content.usatoday.com/communit...upreme-court/1 looks like NBC News's Pete Williams broke the story and others are just reporting his announcement it won't be official until I read it on Drudge (I am still waiting for Obama's tweet) |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#25 |
Blue Crack Addict
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,600
Local Time: 08:32 AM
|
With Sotomayor replacing Souter and Kragen replacing Stevens, the Court will be less liberal.
The only hope is that these two new members will be able to construct arguments that can sway Kennedy. I am not hopeful. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#26 | |
Blue Crack Supplier
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 33,241
Local Time: 12:32 PM
|
Quote:
you think? with not one, not two, but three women, i am concerned that decisions will be more irrational and based on emotion, and often given to erratic changes in mood and emotional neediness. one day they're conservative, the next way liberal, what's a straight white guy to do to talk some sense into these ladies? |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#27 |
Blue Crack Addict
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,600
Local Time: 08:32 AM
|
yes, there is cause for concern
we will have a wise Latina and two Jewish women will they remember to put America first? |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#28 | |
Blue Crack Supplier
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 33,241
Local Time: 12:32 PM
|
Quote:
clearly, they'll have to set aside their (a)gend(a)er and/or religious or ethnic preferences and vote according to the laws. that's a tall order. our last president knew that only a white man isn't burdened by his life experiences and can see clearly. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#29 |
Blue Crack Supplier
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 33,241
Local Time: 12:32 PM
|
the Christofascist right is already calling her a lesbian.
seems like she probably is. who knows? i'd almost like it to come out and we can all discuss it. would love to see someone try to defend the point that being gay or lesbian automatically disqualifies you from SCOTUS. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#30 |
Blue Crack Addict
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,600
Local Time: 08:32 AM
|
I feel the need to revise my original estimate of votes for her
I still say she gets on the court, I now think she will get few (if any, except Lieberman) GOP votes, there is too much risk in voting for her, it is more politically savvy to vote no just ask Bob Bennett of Utah. there is enough political cover in saying a vote for solicitor general should not equate as approval for S C. few solicitors general have any Judaical experience, most SC appointments have Judaical experience |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#31 | |
Blue Crack Addict
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,600
Local Time: 08:32 AM
|
Quote:
She needs to be more like Condi Rice, make jokes about her husband, Obama having bought property with her SO, under the radar (gaydar) if she is gay, she will have to recuse herself from anything related to gay-issues, such as the Prop 8 lawsuit Ted Olson is pursuing. She obviously would have a bias. ![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#32 | |
Blue Crack Addict
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 18,870
Local Time: 12:32 PM
|
Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#33 |
Blue Crack Supplier
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 33,241
Local Time: 12:32 PM
|
i think she sails through like Roberts. slam dunk.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#34 | |
Blue Crack Addict
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,600
Local Time: 08:32 AM
|
really? 78=22
Quote:
with few if any GOP voting for her. I guess it is safe for Bob Bennett to vote for her now. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#35 |
Blue Crack Addict
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 18,870
Local Time: 12:32 PM
|
She's going to be confirmed. I still think it'll be something like 62-65 votes.
Of course the GOP has lost its collective mind so I could also see a vote of just short of 60. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#36 |
Blue Crack Addict
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,600
Local Time: 08:32 AM
|
a third of the senate is up every two years, so we have this Nov and 2012 looming large
why would any GOP risk voting for her? it would just enable a viable challenge in GOP Senate primaries, look at what happened in UT and to Crist in FL where is the up side to voting for her? for a GOP Senator? |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#37 | |
Blue Crack Addict
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 18,870
Local Time: 12:32 PM
|
Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#38 |
Blue Crack Addict
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,600
Local Time: 08:32 AM
|
that sounds reasonable, Collins is not up for reelection until 2014
Snowe is up again in 2012, I don't know how much she would have to worry about a challenge in her primary then. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#39 |
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: It's Inside A Black Hole
Posts: 6,637
Local Time: 10:32 AM
|
A long time ago, in a galaxy far far away, Republicans used to vote for SC nominees on the principle that the Constitution gives the President the prerogative, end of story.
Ginsburg (appointed by Clinton) 96-3 Breyer (appointed by Clinton) 87-9 It was one thing I always admired about the Republicans. They did have some principle at one time. I know, like I said, another galaxy... Democrats are too diluted (or diverse) to ever have similar principles. That's neither a good or bad thing, IMO, it just is what it is. Mostly, less effective politics. Unfortunate. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#40 |
Blue Crack Addict
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,600
Local Time: 08:32 AM
|
On October 31, 2005 President Bush announced that he was nominating Alito to O'Connor's seat, and he submitted the nomination to the Senate on November 10, 2005
__________________Judge Alito was unanimously rated "well qualified" to fill the Associate Justice post by the American Bar Association's Standing Committee on Federal Judiciary, which measures the professional qualifications of a nominee. The committee rates judges as "not qualified," "qualified," or "well qualified." On January 24, his nomination was voted out of the Senate Judiciary Committee on a 10-8 party line vote. After a failed filibuster attempt by Senator John Kerry, on January 31, the Senate confirmed Alito to the Supreme Court by a vote of 58-42, with four Democratic senators voting for confirmation and one Republican and an Independent voting against. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|