it's Alito! - Page 5 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 11-04-2005, 10:43 AM   #81
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 28,324
Local Time: 05:18 PM
But judges aren't politicians, are they? Not appointed ones at least
__________________

MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 11-04-2005, 10:48 AM   #82
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 28,324
Local Time: 05:18 PM
http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dl...511030477/1012

Three decades before the Supreme Court decriminalized homosexual sex, Alito declared on behalf of his group of fellow Princeton students that "no private sexual act between consenting adults should be forbidden." Alito also called for an end to discrimination against homosexuals in hiring.


As a federal appellate judge, Alito has built a scant record on gay-rights issues and a mixed one, at best, on privacy matters generally, in the view of civil liberties advocates who are still examining his opinions.
__________________

MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 11-04-2005, 10:49 AM   #83
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 02:18 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by MrsSpringsteen
But judges aren't politicians, are they? Not appointed ones at least
That is the ideal. But the majority of judges in the US are selected as part of a political process.

It is also the prime reason why Roberts refused to answer so many questions. As a politician, a judge can buy votes by answering questions to satisfy the various constituencies represented by a committee.
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 11-04-2005, 12:21 PM   #84
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Macfistowannabe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Ohio
Posts: 4,197
Local Time: 05:18 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by MrsSpringsteen
[B]does anyone really believe it when anyone says they won't have an agenda or be an activist?[B]
Apparently, you're an "activist" if you understand that Roe V Wade is not in the Constitution.

Of course, we could argue that bad-girl Ruth Ginsburg is an activist...
- She wants to make it mandatory for women to register for the draft.
- She wants the age of consent lowered to 12 years of age.
- She supports legalized prostitution.

And yet, some swear on their life that Clinton was a "moderate."

If that were the case, than ACLU is Centerville.
Macfistowannabe is offline  
Old 11-04-2005, 01:31 PM   #85
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,601
Local Time: 01:18 PM
Quote:
WASHINGTON — President Bush (search) said Friday that he is disappointed he won't get a new Supreme Court justice for Christmas as he wanted.
What the #%@& is wrong with the world???
we have ruined his Christmas, I am heart-broken.
deep is offline  
Old 11-04-2005, 01:33 PM   #86
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 02:18 PM
Would he get his justice if he called it a holiday party?
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 11-04-2005, 01:42 PM   #87
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,601
Local Time: 01:18 PM
RBG would feel included.
deep is offline  
Old 11-04-2005, 05:19 PM   #88
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,601
Local Time: 01:18 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511
not a good comparision


Darth began as a hero
and became a villain


Cheney has always been evil
deep is offline  
Old 06-25-2007, 01:27 PM   #89
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,601
Local Time: 01:18 PM
I never really liked this Alito guy.


And this court is going in the wrong direction.

It is cases that don't seem to get major headlines that may be more worrisome.


Quote:
Supreme Court shoots down lawsuit over religious charity

Jun 25, 2007, 17:03 GMT

Washington - The US Supreme Court ruled Monday that citizens cannot challenge in court US President George W Bush's plan to help religious charity groups receive federal financing.

Bush launched the faith-based initiative shortly after taking office in 2001 to assist religious organizations performing community services to combat poverty, drug addition or other social ills.

The Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that the Freedom From Religion Foundation, which filed the lawsuit, cannot sue the White House or other government officials to stop them from encouraging religious groups to apply for federal grants.

The majority opinion determined that the Freedom From Religion Foundation's argument that federal agencies could use the money to pay for the building of churches and the distribution of religious symbols was unfounded.

'None of these things has happened,' Justice Samuel Alito wrote.
deep is offline  
Old 06-25-2007, 01:32 PM   #90
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,601
Local Time: 01:18 PM
Quote:
Conservatives go 4-4 today at the Supreme Court

Let's stay with our baseball theme today.

Legal and political conservatives hit for the cycle Monday morning when they "won" four long-awaited rulings from the United States Supreme Court. The Justices further chipped away at the wall that separates church and state, took some of the steam out of the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law, neutered federal regulators in environmental cases to the benefit of developers and slammed a high school kid who had the temerity to put up a silly sign near his high school.

Each of these decisions help establish the true conservative bona fides of this Court. It is more conservative than it was last term, when Sandra Day O'Connor sat in one some of the cases. And was more conservative last term than the term before that, before Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Sam Alito joined the Gang of Nine. In fact, the Court now is is so entrenched on the ground of the legal right that, aside from the global warming case decided earlier this year, it is hard to point to a single major ruling this term that could or would give succor to legal liberals or even jurisprudential moderates.

I'm not talking about the technical cases that make up the bulk of the Court's workload-- in those cases there was plenty of unanimity. I'm talking about the hot-button cases that get people talking. Whether it was the Court's dramatic limitations on the rights of employees to seek legal remedies for past employment discrimination-- part of a larger trend of pro-business rulings from the Justices-- or the about-face on the Congressional effort to ban a type of abortion, court conservatives were consistently able to muster up five votes-- thanks to the most important swingman since Benny Goodman, Justice Anthony Kennedy.

Indeed, so strong is the conservative bent to the court right now that even when its right-facing Justices did not agree on the legal reasons or rationale for their rulings-- which was the case in the religion case noted above-- they are able to agree to promote government sponsorship of religion and to block taxpayer efforts to prevent it. In other words, there is room for dissent even among the Court's working majority-- a bad sign for liberal judges, lawyers and litigants in the months and years to come.

People can and do and will disagree about the "correctness" of these rulings-- but no one should have any doubt now that President George W. Bush's campaign promise-- to take the Supreme Court to the right-- has been fulfilled. That question is no longer open to argument and you need only to take a few minutes to read today's rulings to understand why.
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/bench...6/post_36.html
deep is offline  
Old 06-25-2007, 01:52 PM   #91
Blue Crack Distributor
 
LarryMullen's POPAngel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: I'll be up with the sun, I'm not coming down...
Posts: 53,698
Local Time: 04:18 PM
Disheartening, to say the least.
__________________

LarryMullen's POPAngel is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:18 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com
×