Posted on 05/29/2016 11:22:12 AM PDT by Olog-hai
We got a terribly wrong answer, but it was a success because there was a consensus for it.
/s
Aren’t you glad John Roberts that your friends with Cruz...your both losers...
I recall with some amusement many decades ago when four of us "far-right-wing" Republican Womens' Club ladies living in a conservative county outside of Chicago decided to covertly infiltrate two meetings of our local League of Women voters... and report back to our club.
We did so and later I did a write-up of our findings for a private nationally-circulated conservative newsletter I was writing at the time. Our eyes were really opened....though we were not at all surprised. We knew a lot about how the League operated, and we wanted to sit in on a couple meetings as benign "spies" to see and hear for ourselves.
In a nutshell, and contrary to their organization's name, the League ladies never "vote" on whether or not to publicly support or oppose a local or national issue. They discuss, then take a verbal "consensus"...always ending up on the liberal/socialist/more-government side, of course.
Preparatory information and propaganda on the issue is pre-sent to the chapter heads by the national organization headquarters in Washington, D.C.
Discussion is led and fed by the chapter leader and at the right time, an oral "consensus" is taken.
Beware of the word "consensus", especially when mouthed by a Supreme Court Justice. The word is not your friend. It's a synonym for controlled "group think". Remember, liberals and leftists don't like individualists, just "groups, masses and "common good".
We didn't call the organization "The League of Women Vipers" for nothing at the time of our undercover mission...and that's what I still call this anti-freedom bunch today.
Leni
Thanks for the inside report....a real eye-opener.
The disintegrated mode of thought of secular humanist world view rejects broad abstract principles and replaces them with relativism and consensus. If the consensus angers some important group, an amendment or further deals can be made later. This is accepted by elite republican establishment as action without ideology.
Or so they try to claim. There is always an ideology behind it, though.
Ann’s Omelet Recipe
1. Gather every egg in your kitchen. Throw them all down the garbage disposal. (This omelet is going to be so good. Trust me.)
2. Go out to your breaker box and turn off the electricity to your entire home. (No, really. It’s going to cook up better than anything you’ve ever had before.)
3. Burn your house down. (This omelet is going to be delicious. You’ll see.)
4. Find a handgun. Load it, cock it, put it in your mouth, pull the trigger and blow your brainstem to kingdom come. (Can’t you almost smell how delicious this omelet is going to be?)
This is pretty much was Washington DC is doing to make an omelette....
Wish he’d just do his job and protect the US constitution for a change. How about that, Roberts, you politically correct traitor.
The only consensus he cares about is one with Obama.
Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. said Sunday that he was seeking greater consensus on the Supreme Court, adding that more consensus would be likely if controversial issues could be decided on the “narrowest possible grounds.” […]Quite a bit of dissembling even back then. The “broader agreement” has universally served to undermine the rule of law versus benefit.
“If it is not necessary to decide more to a case, then in my view it is necessary not to decide more to a case,” Chief Justice Roberts said. “Division should not be artificially suppressed, but the rule of law benefits from a broader agreement. The broader the agreement among the justices, the more likely it is a decision on the narrowest possible grounds.”
His comments come as the court is under criticism by some members of Congress who say the justices have overreached in decisions that struck down the death penalty for juveniles and allowed cities to use eminent domain powers to take homes for private economic development. …
Under Roberts, I’d like to see one example, just one, where one of the leftist judges on the court took a side which was counter to what we all knew they would take in advance? I don’t think so. So who is Roberts trying to influence?
Because agreeing with the subversives is more important than upholding the Constitution and rule of law.
Kennedy, Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, Kagan, and Roberts have disgraced themselves and brought disrepute on the Court. They must be impeached.
Consensus...???????
HOW ABOUT CONSTITUTION...???????
That's true up to a point.
You'll find "conservative" justices occasionally agreeing with liberal justices.
But notice how the four hard core liberal justices ALWAYS vote for the liberal side.
No liberal justice ever seems to "flip".
And to think that Souter was supposed to be "conservative".
Once on the court, he became as bad as Ginsberg.
Consensus is not a prerogative in legal decision making unless you are in mediation or arbitration.
There is the Constitution and precedent. Politics and errors which are made in inferior courts should be decided based on the above bases. A judge’s personal political leanings or personal philosophy that the Constitution is a living document or even oppositionally,is etched like words on the Moses’tablets should be set aside.
The principles and procedures we inherited from the English Common Law as well as the Natural Law should guide Supreme Court decision making even when it is ignored in the lower courts.
Sounds radical I know. But will love to hear other thoughts.
...and when that doesn’t work, I simply rewrite the law to make the president happy.....
I hear commentators say that if we don't get a conservative President we will lose the Court for a generation... NO! We will lose the Republic forever.
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.