Posted on 06/13/2023 8:45:55 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
We have a lot of Freepers here who don’t give their comments much thought..
*************
That’s pretty much standard across the entire human element. jmo
The kill ratio is 10-1 in Russia's favor.
So, you’re one of the few here that likes McConnell?
But, if a Republican establishment type had won the Presidency instead of Trump, he or she would never have named enough judges to SCOTUS to overturn Roe.
They are as good as you can possibly get. Trump was the first GOP President not to nominate a total dud. These guys vote more than 90$ the right way.
Most of the attacks on them here are for cases they did not take. These are complex, almost always due to “ripeness” and/or the fact that a specific case brought before them is really weak in major ways and/or doesn’t address the key underlying Constitutional law. This was the case with abortion. They booted the weak TX case in favor of a stronger MS case. They have overwhelmingly reduced the power of the Deep State in multiple rulings. They have reaffirmed private gun ownership.
The major area where people are upset were in the election fraud cases. There are two things here. First, any (ALL) courts hesitate to get involved in any election issues. The USSC in 2000 HATED having to get involved in Bush v. Gore. But more important, ANY election case has to involved a remedy that the court can clearly delineate that won’t open up 20 other cases. Say there is a fraud case in AZ: a ruling there would have to be comprehensive enough to anticipate related Constitutional challenges in 49 other states. Thus, if they don’t get a “clean” case that allows them to do this, they won’t take it.
I know most Freepers don’t like that answer, but that is absolutely the legal reasoning. In the gun case, since Heller had already refined the law, the Court could make a clear ruling. In Dobbs, it could do two things quickly and easily: overturn Roe/Casey, and send it back to the states. Note that the Court did NOT rule on when life begins.
I think Gorsuch was 100% correct when he said in one case the Court turned down, “It isn’t our job to write the laws” or words to that effect.
If Ron DeSantis is the nominee, I'll vote for him despite the fact that I'm concerned he needs more seasoning.
Very good summary, thank you.
Trump is fortunate he got to pick 3, and I’d say they have been quite good. I thank God he got that chance.
Unlike many, I don’t hate McConnell. You deal with what you have. Tell KY voters if you’re so upset about him.
I’m not overly pleased about any RINOs (real or imaginary), but you do the best you can and work WITH them to get your way AMAP. In my native land, I’m excited to have a RINO rather than outright Dem, who think they can run roughshod over everything because were used to liberalism. People pick on Larry Hogan and Rob Ehrlich but they were the first R govs in 4 decades and they did many things that were conservative.
Got examples?
The “Im Trump, but better”campaigning of Desantis is the stupidest campaign I’ve ever seen.
You cannot work with RINOs.
We need to pray for no accidents for old Clarence.
No kidding.
Kavanaugh is better than Kennedy.
Politics is the art of the possible.
Only an evil idiot demands absolute ideological adherence or complete loyalty.
The point is that the condemnation of some fatass who has probably never run for office, held an office, or managed a campaign means exactly diddly squat.
People who haven’t been actually involved in elections and politicking are like sports fans screaming about blown calls or bad coaches- good for a laugh.
I have more respect for someone who gets off their ass, runs a campaign, and wins election to an office -be it dogcatcher or congress person - than any idiot who thinks they’ve done their duty by merely voting.
Even if I utterly disagree with the former and completely agree with the latter.
For every person bitching about AOC, for example, how many have done phone banking, walked precincts, organized vanpools to take people to the polls? Those are the only people who deserve respect, no matter how ‘impure’ some of their views.
Not just judges.
When it comes to judges, though, you’re never going to get somebody who agrees with you 100% of the time.
If they do, they aren’t really judges, since the law won’t always coincide with what one wants.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.