Posted on 07/06/2005 12:37:57 PM PDT by The_Eaglet
You know the Supreme Court is not suppose to be the end all to end all. It's time we took a closer look at them. Maybe impeach some of them.
The main thing is how George Soros's and his gain are manipulating the people for his agenda and to bring the throughly disgusting Hillary Clinton to power. Just remember this woman is not your friend. She will turn on anyone that gets in her way and I feel for the people that have crossed paths with her.
Also, she is not that powerful, herself. She is only a puppet and really not a very smart one. Her supporters have pushed positive images of her which are completely untrue, to the point that she is becoming a big joke, which is exactly what she is and has always been.
It is amazing how two idiots could become President of the US.
Ha! Whatever happened to that guy? I bet he's available.
Just what do you have against the prospect of 4-4-1 USSC decisions?
Judge Judy!!!!
LOL Wouldn't that make the leftists scream and spit.
Well said, and true for me also.
BTW, a tie vote means the decision below stands, but no precedent is set. A judgment without an agreed decision decides the specific case, but provides zero guidance to future courts and counsel who must struggle with similar cases.
We need at least a majority of Justices who will obey and respect the Constitution. That would be a good beginning.
John / Billybob
I was obviously wrong in thinking I didn't need to add a smiley face. Sorry to send you off like that. I was joking.
Great choice.
"Failure to nominate a Scalia-like, originalist judge will bring the most catastrophic consquences the Republican party has seen since Watergate."
It amuses me to see someone post that Scalia is an originalist. He believes that "settled law" should not be changed, ie Roe v Wade. That is one who believes in judicial prescedents.
Um- no thanks. I think knowledge of the Constitution is kinda important for the next Justice to have.
If Bush nominates anyone to the right of Barbara Boxer, the media will call the nominee a fascist. So if he's going to take heat for any nominee, why not run the real deal? The media has cried wolf so many times that no one believes their rhetoric anymore.
Sometimes, a single word can capture the essence of an entire administration.
What are babbling about? Scalia HAS voted of overturn Roe:
The claim that a single Supreme Court appointment could result in overturning the Roe decision was true -- more than a decade ago. In 1992 the court voted by a bare 5-4 majority to reaffirm Roe in a pivotal case, Planned Parenthood v. Casey.
But one of the four justices who voted to overturn Roe was Byron White, who retired the following year to be replaced by Ruth Bader Ginsburg, a Roe supporter. White died in 2002. That leaves only three current members -- Chief Justice William Rhenquist and Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas -- who voted to overturn Roe and who continue to say it was wrongly decided.
We would be better off finding a younger version of Moore.
I'm sure we can get a jurist just like Moore but maybe around 50?
Why would Roy Moore as governor be a bad thing? What are you afraid of?
You are talking about the concept of stare decisis.
Only one judge does not believe in it is on SCOTUS, and he has never stated such (his collegues have)....Justice Thomas.
Generally, I do believe in overturning point blank unconstitutional law, but the concept of stare decisis is generally done to give the courts a consistancy (i.e. no here today interpretation, gone tomorrow).
For the record, I don't like stare decisis and would prefer a Justice Thomas like clone.
But good luck finding one, no judge will ever admit to opposing what they consider a "Cornerstone of the laws foundation".
Because I would like this state to be able to recruit jobs, something that our last Religious Right governor was completely abysmal at.
I would also like this state to pass some modest tort reform, and given that Mr. Moore has made his devil's bargain with Beasley and Co., I don't see that happening either
Roy Moore is not just interested in becoming governor, he wants to put slates of chosen candidates in office as well. The last governor we had that did this was George Wallace, and it seems as if Mr. Roy wants to try and adapt the GCW playbook to the early 21st century.
Moore is also tied in with former Chief Justice Terry Butts, and if there was ever a judge that was a whore for trial lawyers, it was Butts, and Butts is now passing himself off as a man of the religious right.
The Trial Lawyers provided the lions share of Moore slate campaign money last year, and I don't see signs of this dissipating.
Moore also poses a very real threat to Jeff Sessions. Of the two U.S Senators, Sessions is the easier one to unseat, some prognosticators believe it would have been a tight race if McPhillips had won the primary instead of Parker.
Now, why does Moore pose a threat to Jeff Sessions. Because Sessions has opposed Moore for the last 6 years, and as Jean Brown proves, Moore's people remember every slight, and they do carry out grudges. You are either with them or against them, just like with Wallace (or to go back further in history, Bilbo)
Moore has been at odds with the state's business community for most of his political career. That's why he takes the religious right tack he does, without it, he'd be dead in the Republican Party. Politically speaking, he is definitely a product of Etowah County.
Also on a more personal note, I am a practicing Catholic, and as such, the idea that Moore's base consists primarily of Baptists and Pentecostals sets me off ease, especially when he draws the lion share of those who are likely to have a problem with Catholics.
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.