Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: sirthomasthemore

This is unbelievable. The founding fathers are rolling over in their graves.

So what's the solution folks? After a decade of Republican control of the Congress and a half decade of Republican control of the White House and Congress it's come to this?

Absurd. A socialist policy to further the ambitions of the robber-barons of industry.


5 posted on 06/23/2005 10:51:46 PM PDT by Old_Mil
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Old_Mil

The landowners should lock themselves in their house, raise the Gonzales "Come and Take it Flag" of Texas Independence, and arm themselves. Make the government come and physically take their property at the barrel of a gun on national television.


6 posted on 06/23/2005 10:58:39 PM PDT by bstein80 (u)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: Old_Mil
The founding fathers are rolling over in their graves.

Next decision will be about quartering British troops in our homes.

11 posted on 06/23/2005 11:07:18 PM PDT by Age of Reason
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: Old_Mil

Why can't congress pass a law banning the practice?

All the courts did is say it's constitutional (which it ISN'T). That doesn't mean there can't be a federal law prohibiting it.


21 posted on 06/23/2005 11:21:52 PM PDT by DB (©)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: Old_Mil
And it's not as if this latest property-rights defeat is an isolated incident of judicial liberalism. We've had all too many examples of liberalism gone mad just in recent weeks from the "high" court:

- If a 17-year-old plans and carries out a mass murder in which thousands of innocent human beings are killed, no American state is allowed to execute him because he hadn't yet turned 18 years of age. (A 5-4 ruling with Kennedy joining the four liberals.)

- The Supreme Court should take into consideration foreign courts' views when considering cases like the death penalty. (A 6-3 opinion with only three justices dissenting - Scalia, Thomas and Rehnquist.)

- Even after a dangerous violent criminal has been convicted by a jury, the court system may not put the criminal in shackles for his sentencing hearing in front of the same jury unless he has exhibited signs of behaving violently in the court system before. (A 7-2 decision with only Scalia and Thomas dissenting.)

- Without any specific evidence of racial bias, the Supreme Court assumed Texas prosecutors were racists when they dismissed 10 of 11 blacks during jury selection. (A 6-3 ruling with only Scalia, Thomas and Rehnquist dissenting).

24 posted on 06/23/2005 11:31:32 PM PDT by billclintonwillrotinhell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson