Skip to comments.
ABC radio news and NYT speculate - Bush has decided-Specter called to WH
ABC News
| 07/18/05
| self
Posted on 07/18/2005 8:13:56 PM PDT by mysonsfuture
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 401-420, 421-440, 441-460 ... 641-649 next last
To: Abby4116
Look at Specter's latest statements. The guy is a sellout along with Hagel, McCain and a gaggle of other RINOs.
421
posted on
07/19/2005 1:42:45 AM PDT
by
stocksthatgoup
(http://www.busateripens.com)
To: mysonsfuture
Mainstream? It has to be Chirac
422
posted on
07/19/2005 1:47:04 AM PDT
by
The Raven
(Liberalism is a faith-based ideology)
To: wardaddy
Originalists are pro-active. They are activists in supporting and protecting the original intent of the Framers as set forth in the Constitution. It is the sacred duty of a Supreme Court justice to be as active as possible in ruling in accordance with the Constitution, and that means paying scant attention to stare decisis.
When a ruling is Consitutionally wrong, the Court must overturn it as soon as possible whether the rogue decision was from the previous term or 100 years ago.
The misguided concept that a liberal court can wrongly decide all manner of cases and then future courts are just stuck with that is not and has never been consistent with originalism. Because the liberal courts are never "stuck" with a properly decided case, stare decisis only serves to further the liberal agenda with the complicit non-activist conservatives as accessories to the wrong.
To: hole_n_one; AGreatPer
Wow .. freepers are everywhere with the news
424
posted on
07/19/2005 2:15:32 AM PDT
by
Mo1
To: The Raven
To: kcvl
My surmise: If Specter is being called and A Great Per heard this from Sanctorum's office, President Bush selected someone from Pennsylvania because the "home state Senators" who will introduce the nominee would be Specter and Santorum.
426
posted on
07/19/2005 2:34:05 AM PDT
by
HateBill
(Democratic Message: "Kiss Terrorist A*s" vs. Republican Message: "Kick Terrorist A*s")
To: LibertarianInExile
A couple years ago I had a case before the 5th Circuit and I thought that Edith Clement was going to be on the panel, so I started reading her cases. I couldn't form any opinions about her judicial philosophy as her writings were few and very non-specific.
I will be very upset if she is nominated to the Supreme Court. She is a pig in a poke. If another Bush says "trust me, I know what's inside the poke," I'm not willing to do so. This is not what I worked for or would find remotely acceptable.
We have the chance to appoint any number of originalists to the Court and begin the long process of turning the Court around. Clements on the bench is highly unlikely to be much of an improvement over O'Connor, if any.
To: mysonsfuture
bumpers for laters
prisoner6
428
posted on
07/19/2005 2:51:07 AM PDT
by
prisoner6
(Right Wing Nuts hold the country together as the loose screws of the left fall out!)
To: LibertarianInExile
So glad that you said that. This mantra of "you never weighed in on someone who wasn't even being seriously discussed until she started being seriously discussed means you can't discuss her" is a bunch of bull.
To: RightWhale
Specter was DA in Philly. He is well-grounded in law.Specter? Awww...don't say that.
To: GOPrincess
I'm thinking this is a semantics game...the President is trying to co-opt the word "mainstream" and choose a conservative, indicating that that *is* mainstream.Given that polls now are consistently showing Americans to be more "conservative" than "liberal", he's right: Being Conservative IS mainstream in America.
Of course, sitting here at this liberal university, it is hard to see that.
431
posted on
07/19/2005 3:09:10 AM PDT
by
AFPhys
((.Praying for President Bush, our troops, their families, and all my American neighbors..))
To: jwalsh07
YES!!!!!! Here's hoping GW told Spector to sit down and shut up.
432
posted on
07/19/2005 3:14:06 AM PDT
by
hershey
To: Iwo Jima
I ran a WL search just to see if I could find a single opinion, even dicta, in her analysis. I must have looked through 40 cases and I ain't found crap. She's a master of terse, and that's great and all, but not for this kind of nomination. I want the truth, and believe me, I can handle it.
"If another Bush says 'trust me, I know what's inside the poke,' I'm not willing to do so. This is not what I worked for or would find remotely acceptable."
100% right. No more 'trust me.' Not on this. I'll trust him on reading the CIA reports. I'll trust him on what's up with the budget and what pork he needs to toss out. I'll trust him that the war was necessary. But I will not trust ANY Republican again on an unproven nominee. A KNOWN conservative had better get the nod. No more Souters!
433
posted on
07/19/2005 3:20:58 AM PDT
by
LibertarianInExile
("Property must be secured or liberty cannot exist." -- John Adams. "F that." -- SCOTUS, in Kelo.)
To: Iwo Jima
It's all about quelling the Souter-haters. Gotta put them down because if the RINOs don't, this nominee won't sneak through. Slime the critics, then slide through another RINO...but that won't fly this time. Too many people are tired of O'Connors and Kennedys and Souters. We've worked too hard too long to get screwed again and smile.
434
posted on
07/19/2005 3:25:03 AM PDT
by
LibertarianInExile
("Property must be secured or liberty cannot exist." -- John Adams. "F that." -- SCOTUS, in Kelo.)
To: LibertarianInExile
To: Torie
"I loathe this group representation thingie. "
Me, too. First time I ever thought an unmentionable word in relation to Laura Bush was when I heard her "I want it to be a woman!" comment.
I thought it was the RATS who revelled in that kind of thing... to hell with who's BEST for the job, let's get a "type"! You know: "Isn't it WONDERFUL? We have the first Arab-American, Transgender on the court!" ... gakkk.
Not that I care if it's a woman, particularly - as long as it's a CONSERVATIVE woman (100%) ... but it's repugnant to me that that should be the deciding factor.
To: hineybona
"Mark Levin..why not?"
Ahhhhh.....
Yeeeeeeeesssssssssssssssssssssss............. :-) :-)
To: jwalsh07
If she has been a judge since 1991, she must have a reasonable written record. She is NOT a Souter. She belongs to the Federalist Society, not exactly a harbinger of liberal leanings.
I am fascinated by how everyone predicts all sorts of poor choices by the President, given his track record, which is very good on judicial appointments and the fact that he keeps his word.
438
posted on
07/19/2005 3:41:25 AM PDT
by
Miss Marple
(Karl Rove is Plame-proof.)
To: HateBill
My surmise: If Specter is being called and A Great Per heard this from Sanctorum's office, President Bush selected someone from Pennsylvania because the "home state Senators" who will introduce the nominee would be Specter and Santorum.
That could be Samuel Alito, who is a pretty good judge.
439
posted on
07/19/2005 3:41:43 AM PDT
by
advance_copy
(Stand for life, or nothing at all)
To: mysonsfuture
It's Dan Rather, who is well known for using good judgment.
440
posted on
07/19/2005 3:57:06 AM PDT
by
Preachin'
(Georgia finally saw the light in 2000.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 401-420, 421-440, 441-460 ... 641-649 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson