HELLOOoo? HELLLOOoooo ?
What part of 'L O S E R' don't the libs understand????
It's not their turn to do anything....they don't have a turn....they LOST!!!
There, that's better...
That's funny, I don't remember bill clinton making courtesy calls on the Republicans when he proposed controversial appointments. He was far too busy playing gold, going to fund raisers, or traveling to foreign parts with his cast of thousands.
I think Bush should meet with these folks....and then pin their ears back about the renegade nature of the courts, how he and the Republican Senate are going to rectify the situation, and how they (the Dems) can do nothing to stop them.
"...fall far short of the advice and consent consultations they expect..."
That sentence would sound so much better if it ended with "that the Constitution requires." Or perhaps "that all past Democratic presidents have done."
*Snort*guffaw*snicker*....He has been at so long, the lies all seem like truths to him..
The May agreement was just a delay of the inevitable. This posturing is only a prelude to the filibuster which is a certainty. The Republicans will have to match the audacity of the Democrats or cede control of the federal courts to the minority party.
..DAMN!...not Specter. :((
Why not ask the Dems to present a list of their candidates.
Like social security they wouldn't have ideas, they only want to tear down. They are totally berift of ideas or meaningful proposals.
If they did supply a slate of candidates we would at least get some serious yucks.
The President should wait til the depths of August to announce his nominee (Janice Rodgers Brown), when Teddy will be too busy getting drunk and chasing barmaids in Palm Beach to notice.
This is so much bullshiite it takes the breath away!
The Founding Fathers didn't want or expect the perfumed princes Senators to have any more input other than a simple "yeah" or "nay" vote on the matter.
Here is what the men on the scene when the Constitution was actually written had to say about this matter, and before it was even ratified:
"It will be the office of the President to NOMINATE, and, with the advice and consent of the Senate, to APPOINT. There will, of course, be no exertion of CHOICE on the part of the Senate. They may defeat one choice of the Executive, and oblige him to make another; but they cannot themselves CHOOSE, they can only ratify or reject the choice of the President." - Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 66, 1787
(emphasis in the original)
The Liberals, as usual, are trying to rewrite the constitution to their own advantage.
Considering the animosity and disrespect the leftists have shown to the President, I'm amazed he calls them at all.
He should invite them into the oval office, administer molten iron enemas to them all, then ask them to state their concerns.
-PJ
On PBS Senator Spector was attacking Robert Bork pretty ferociously. Also said something like the American peoples opinions have changed over 200 years. Looks like we might have trouble with him again...
(Sounds of DIMS heads imploding (nature abhors a vacuum))!
Hey! One can dream, can't he? LOL
As leading Democrats lash out at their political enemies the party itself seems to be passing from an erratic state of misdirected introspection, after the 04 election, to what looks very much like breakdown.
This apparent disarray was not caused by foes alone but from a rigid, almost mystical, obsession with “social change” and from an increasing recognition by voters of the contradiction between utopian goals and daily reality.
Their leaders also misjudged the efficacy of the word reform. Reform can be beneficial but carried to extremes it becomes revolution. Revolution is almost always destructive of social order in its struggle to deliver on promises that are not possible in the real world.
Democrat’s have moved so far to the left that many prominent long-time supporters are having second thoughts. The party has lost too many elections. It seems to be weary, without ideas, without a theme, without conviction.
The party that could once pick from a large number of political giants for nomination to high office must now settle for the strongest of the weak -- and it shows.
One of the main reasons for the Democrats’ decline is not hard to find. The left have long enjoyed a supportive, if not biased, exclusive information soapbox provided by the major TV and print media. That source is gone. The leftist media’s influence has been dimmed by a high-tech phenomenon called the “Information Highway.“ No longer restricted to one worldview, information now flows from many springs.
The truth is now out in the open. The internet, blogs, talk radio, best-selling conservative books and publications, and a revitalized well-informed conservative revival have elbowed liberals off the stage.
The serious weakening of one major party in a bi-party system is nothing to cheer about. What makes the precarious position of the Democrats dangerous to the nation is that America thrives on a strong two-party system. Such a system provides balance and stability over the parliamentary systems we see in Europe.
In European countries, a number of minor parties form coalitions to share power that could never be attained individually. But coalitions, like alliances, last only until a better deal comes along for one of its members. Almost the very definition of a political coalition is that it is left-leaning and fragile. European governments come and go with clock-like regularity.
We see this kind of disproportion in America when a third-party candidate manages to attract enough votes to allow the weaker of the two major parties to win with a plurality. Our system must be preserved without becoming a multiparty circus.
So what can be done to fully restore the kind of sound two-party structure that has allowed Americans to create the freest nation on Earth with the highest standard of living ever known, while all other types of government, including “democracies,” have faltered or failed? A good question.
Here voters face a dilemma. The other major party, the Republican party, has lagged only a few steps behind in the Democrat’s long journey to socialism and the welfare state.
For no matter how far to the left the Democrat’s have moved, Republicans have done little to reverse direction. Inaction is tacit acceptance.
Even when the GOP controlled both Congress and the White House no significant efforts have been made over the years to slow or stop the collectivist decay that has slowly eroded Constitutional rule-of-law, individual responsibility, capitalism and self-government.
With the resignation of Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor we could see the beginning of what may well be the defining period that will either speed up the Democrat’s decline or prolong rule by judicial fiat.
With President Bush’s first of what could be several nominations the battle over Constitutional Rule of Law will take place. A “moderate” will never satisfy Democrats in the Senate. Unless Bush nominates a hard-core leftist there will be a battle royal over each confirmation and it promises to be down and dirty.
A major force behind the inexorable socialist drift in America has been the pattern of what amounts to judicial legislation that has taken place in the Supreme Court in recent decades. What was impossible for the left to achieve in the legislative branch has been accomplished by Supreme Court rulings that have many times battered the Constitution.
One of the last rulings by the Court, expanding the definition of Eminent Domain and endangering private property rights, is only the latest in a process that has been on-going for years.
Democrats have made it clear that they are determined to maintain their grip on the high court. The party will fight to the last filibuster to prevent nominees from being elevated to the Supreme Court who do not show a tendency to follow collectivist principles and who have, instead, consistently supported the Constitution’s Original Intent.
If Democrats lose the battle of the Supreme Court its last fluttering breath of life might well echo Democrat National Committee Chairman Howard “Dr. Demento” Dean’s famous bitter wail of defeat and defiance -- Aaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrrrraaaaaaaahhh!
Jack Chesney
660 Laurelwood
Sautee-Nacoochee, GA 30071
July 1, 2005
847 words
You are a looooooooser! Better luck next time. Bush should put the pedal to the metal. Screw um.
As leading Democrats lash out at their political enemies the party itself seems to be passing from an erratic state of misdirected introspection, after the 04 election, to what looks very much like breakdown.
This apparent disarray was not caused by foes alone but from a rigid, almost mystical, obsession with “social change” and from an increasing recognition by voters of the contradiction between utopian goals and daily reality.
Their leaders also misjudged the efficacy of the word reform. Reform can be beneficial but carried to extremes it becomes revolution. Revolution is almost always destructive of social order in its struggle to deliver on promises that are not possible in the real world.
Democrat’s have moved so far to the left that many prominent long-time supporters are having second thoughts. The party has lost too many elections. It seems to be weary, without ideas, without a theme, without conviction.
The party that could once pick from a large number of political giants for nomination to high office must now settle for the strongest of the weak -- and it shows.
One of the main reasons for the Democrats’ decline is not hard to find. The left have long enjoyed a supportive, if not biased, exclusive information soapbox provided by the major TV and print media. That source is gone. The leftist media’s influence has been dimmed by a high-tech phenomenon called the “Information Highway.“ No longer restricted to one worldview, information now flows from many springs.
The truth is now out in the open. The internet, blogs, talk radio, best-selling conservative books and publications, and a revitalized well-informed conservative revival have elbowed liberals off the stage.
The serious weakening of one major party in a bi-party system is nothing to cheer about. What makes the precarious position of the Democrats dangerous to the nation is that America thrives on a strong two-party system. Such a system provides balance and stability over the parliamentary systems we see in Europe.
In European countries, a number of minor parties form coalitions to share power that could never be attained individually. But coalitions, like alliances, last only until a better deal comes along for one of its members. Almost the very definition of a political coalition is that it is left-leaning and fragile. European governments come and go with clock-like regularity.
We see this kind of disproportion in America when a third-party candidate manages to attract enough votes to allow the weaker of the two major parties to win with a plurality. Our system must be preserved without becoming a multiparty circus.
So what can be done to fully restore the kind of sound two-party structure that has allowed Americans to create the freest nation on Earth with the highest standard of living ever known, while all other types of government, including “democracies,” have faltered or failed? A good question.
Here voters face a dilemma. The other major party, the Republican party, has lagged only a few steps behind in the Democrat’s long journey to socialism and the welfare state.
For no matter how far to the left the Democrat’s have moved, Republicans have done little to reverse direction. Inaction is tacit acceptance.
Even when the GOP controlled both Congress and the White House no significant efforts have been made over the years to slow or stop the collectivist decay that has slowly eroded Constitutional rule-of-law, individual responsibility, capitalism and self-government.
With the resignation of Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor we could see the beginning of what may well be the defining period that will either speed up the Democrat’s decline or prolong rule by judicial fiat.
With President Bush’s first of what could be several nominations the battle over Constitutional Rule of Law will take place. A “moderate” will never satisfy Democrats in the Senate. Unless Bush nominates a hard-core leftist there will be a battle royal over each confirmation and it promises to be down and dirty.
A major force behind the inexorable socialist drift in America has been the pattern of what amounts to judicial legislation that has taken place in the Supreme Court in recent decades. What was impossible for the left to achieve in the legislative branch has been accomplished by Supreme Court rulings that have many times battered the Constitution.
One of the last rulings by the Court, expanding the definition of Eminent Domain and endangering private property rights, is only the latest in a process that has been on-going for years.
Democrats have made it clear that they are determined to maintain their grip on the high court. The party will fight to the last filibuster to prevent nominees from being elevated to the Supreme Court who do not show a tendency to follow collectivist principles and who have, instead, consistently supported the Constitution’s Original Intent.
If Democrats lose the battle of the Supreme Court its last fluttering breath of life might well echo Democrat National Committee Chairman Howard “Dr. Demento” Dean’s famous bitter wail of defeat and defiance -- Aaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrrrraaaaaaaahhh!