Posted on 08/18/2008 9:36:45 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Which comes first; the chicken or the egg? True BO’s life experience enjoyed AA’s grace. But without the Chicago Machine, BO would have not faired so well so quickly. After all, he DID move to Chicago to take advantage of the political situation. I can assure you; BO’s rapid rise to power was the working of the Chicago Machine.
Do you believe Obama did all that on his own?
Only in America.
I maintain that approximately 47% of the electorate are either abysmally stupid or over-educated imbeciles....or both.
There are 53% of us left of which a large majority are conservative, with some moderates (you know: moderate, a person (like our president, perhaps) who stands for nothing.
Obama is something entirely different.
First of all, I don't know whether he is a legitimate American citizen. His entire history is buried somewhere, under a rock perhaps.
He is someone who was planted by the communists, nurtured and now has somewhat matured into the America-hating, muslim, pro-abortion clown that the 47% can find no wrong with.
When Democrats (the scourge of the earth as far as I'm concerned and I feel the same way about the damned RINOs) talk about 'bringing us together' that is the absolute LAST thing I want to see!
GRIDLOCK!!!!!!
I think he was directly involved in getting his opponents removed from the ballot the first time he ran for the legislature...the only time it was a real contest. As for the leaks to the Chicago Tribune, I have no idea--perhaps someone unaffiliated with his campaign who wanted him to win was behind those.
Oh, I’m sure he was involved. But he was helped, IMO, by the Chicago Machine.
.
Damn scary thought, but a good possibility since he would impose/do such stupid things that most with an IQ above Flori-DUH? on a hot day would consider socialist/commie....
I wish a lot of people would stop saying "pundints" when they mean to say "pundits". Can't believe how often I hear "pundints".
The final paragraph of that opinion demonstrates clearly why Senator Obama and the far left in America fear a Supreme Court justice who looks to the "intent" or "meaning" of the Founders for guidance in decisions like Kelo. After all, that's what Thomas Jefferson advised, when he said: "On every question of construction, carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or invented against it conform to the probable one in which it was passed." (1823)
Here is the final paragraph of Justice Thomas's opinion:
"The Court relies almost exclusively on this Court’s prior cases to derive today’s far-reaching, and dangerous, result. See ante, at 8—12. But the principles this Court should employ to dispose of this case are found in the Public Use Clause itself, not in Justice Peckham’s high opinion of reclamation laws, see supra, at 11. When faced with a clash of constitutional principle and a line of unreasoned cases wholly divorced from the text, history, and structure of our founding document, we should not hesitate to resolve the tension in favor of the Constitution’s original meaning. For the reasons I have given, and for the reasons given in Justice O’Connor’s dissent, the conflict of principle raised by this boundless use of the eminent domain power should be resolved in petitioners’ favor. I would reverse the judgment of the Connecticut Supreme Court." - Justice Clarence Thomas (Source: Cornell University web site)
To use a phrase the Left often employs, "most Americans," I believe, would find Justice Thomas's "legal mind" to be in accord with that of the genius Jefferson--not with that of the liberal justices and Senator Obama!
Anyone that saw how quick Obama answered that question with Clarence Thomas realized that HE dislikes this guy...big time and of all the justices he could have said first....he mentioned a black justice. Wow? You think in this church congregation they looked at Clarence Thomas as an enemy???
“I wish a lot of people would stop saying ‘pundints’ when they mean to say ‘pundits’. Can’t believe how often I hear ‘pundints’.”
Really? I’ve never heard anyone say “pundints” nor have I ever seen it written. Is it a regional thing?
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.