Posted on 09/26/2005 6:12:00 PM PDT by wagglebee
Was Ruth the model for the "Old Maid" card game?
The Left shows it's fangs once again.
My folks, who are Bush hating aficionados, love Roberts. He did more in those hearings to illustrate the absurdity of modern day Democrats than family discussions, editorials, et. al. could ever do.
I suspect the mask has finally come off the modern day Democrats for many of the JFK Democrats who now see them in the appropriate light.
Ginsberg wants quotas. A system which ONLY allows left leaning women and excludes all straight men.
These comments .. she has already decided and prejudged how she will vote when a case is presented to the USSC
I think it should be a ROUTINE motion to recuse Ginsburg every time ANY ACLU brief is filed.
She may not recuse herself but if it is done 100% of the time, it sends a message to the public that Ginsberg is biased to favor anything the ACLU does.
bump
Justice Ginsburg is coming close to violating the separation of powers, and the alleged non-partisan natur eof the Supreme Court. Should she cross the line of partisanship, that should be an impeachable offense.
Ruthie is to the Constitution what a billy goat is to a garden.
Yes it is the truth. We as Republicans are fooling ourselves by insisting that the selection of a SC justice should be non-partisan. It is deeply partisan. The Democrats have made it so, and its time Republicans countered.
I cannot even look at ginsberg without thinking of the wicked witch of the west.
Republicans voted unanimously to appoint Ginsburg because they believe (at least the Republicans that voted for her at the time do) that avoiding controversy is more important than property rights, second amendment rights, the right to life, and marriage. That is the hard truth.
But the Conservatives are Constitutionalists. The Liberals are the "living document" types.
Therefore it is partisan in a way already. The Libs spit on the document they are sworn to defend. Odd really.
The easiest solution, if Ginsburg is uncomfortable, is to retire.
Ummmm.....Let me guess, Ruth.
Every single one of those "highly qualified women" is a liberal.
Am I right or am I right?
When a liberal President is in the White House again, I am sure that he will be very interested in your list.
In the meantime, as the author of the article points out, the Constitution gives Supreme Court Justices ZERO, NADA, ZIP, ZILCH role in deciding who will be appointed to the U.S. Supreme Court.
She likes her women tall and blonde.
Nah, just anti-male.
She is out of the mainstream, a total left winger and in this case she was voicing a political opinion on who the president should nominate, something she has zero role in and is imappropriate for a Supreme Court justice to do. So when she decides to take political potshots I can call her out the way I might call Hillary out. Nonetheless, I was impolite and your point is well taken.
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.