Posted on 07/12/2012 5:26:36 AM PDT by Sir Napsalot
Instead 'limiting government' is now 'radicalization of the judicial power'.
No mystery. Just another stealth liberal who pulled the wool over the eyes of a member of the Bush family.
I do believe that any article from the NY Slimes needs a Barf Alert...
“Instead ‘limiting government’ is now ‘radicalization of the judicial power’.”
That’s how warped it’s gotten. A republican judge thinks it activism when he limits government.....twilight zone type of stuff.
I need a barf bag and cleanup on aisle 5 after reading just the excerpt. Where is the hurl alert?!!!
The initial sentence of this excerpt made me utter aloud an expletive and stop reading.
The SC was handily corrupted and intimidated into following the commie line by FDR and has been working against the interests of the populaton to the benefit of those intent on eliminating the States soveriegnty ever since. Roberts was either bought off or intimidated or both.
The word devolution would have been a more appropriate choice.
Ring my friend I said you'd call Dr. Robert(s),
Day or night he'll be there anytime at all Dr. Robert(s).
Dr. Robert(s), your a new and better man,
He helps you to understand,
He does everything he can, Dr. Robert(s).
If your down he'll pick you up Dr. Robert(s),
Take a drink from his special cup Dr. Robert(s)
Dr. Robert(s), he's a man you must believe,
Helping everyone in need,
No one can succeed like Dr. Robert(s)
Well, well, well your feeling fine,
Well, well, well, he'll make you Dr. Robert(s)
My friend works for the national health Dr. Robert(s),
Don't take money to see yourself with Dr. Robert(s)
Dr. Robert(s), your a new and better man,
He helps you to understand,
He does everything he can Dr. Robert(s)
Well, well, well, your feeling fine,
Well, well, well, he'll make you Dr. Robert(s)
Ring my friend I said you'd call Dr. Robert(s) (2x)
Dr. Robert(s)!
BUMP!
When you post crap like this please have the common decency to include a “BARF ALERT.”
Linda Greenhouse - from her bio on Wikipedia:
“Greenhouse has also been criticized for her failure to maintain the appearance of objectivity.[15] Greenhouse expresses her personal views as an outspoken advocate for abortion rights and critic of conservative religious values.[15] In 1989, Greenhouse was rebuked by Times editors for participating in an abortion-rights rally in Washington.” Yep, 100% all-in for partial birth abortion!
Also this:
“She has also faced criticism for a June 2006 speech at Harvard University criticizing US policies and actions at Guantanamo Bay, Abu Ghraib, and Haditha.[15] In the speech, Greenhouse said she started crying a few years back at a Simon & Garfunkel concert because her generation hadn’t done a better job of running the country than previous generations.” Waaaa, what a putz!
Bottom line - scumbag
“Just another stealth liberal who pulled the wool over the eyes of a member of the Bush family.”
I know right. How many is that now? I’ve lost count.
When liberals get put on the court they are liberal to the core for the entire time they are there....when republicans get put on the court they worry about how they look in the New York Post
Sorry, all.
I forgot a Barf tag .... I thought it was automatic when linking to NY Times.
There is nobody in this country that does not know that Roberts understood what should have been done. He threw that all away to insure his legacy. Well, he did, with me!
Or the Bush family is pulling the wool over your eyes.
James 1:8
An astounding distortion of the intent of the founders to have the Supreme Court do just that. Especially the FEDERAL government.
I have felt this to be a state's rights issue from the beginning. For the federal government to mandate the purchase of a product or service from a private entity, a product that is not currently allowed to be purchased over state lines, is a usurpation of state authority, if not sovereignty, pure and simple.
What is it about the phrase "enumerated powers" that these people do not understand?
It would not have constituted "judicial activism" to strike down the federal mandate, and the rest of the law, and thus leave the states with the obligation of caring for their citizens, even if insurance were allowed to be purchased across state lines. The invalidation of the commerce clause for this particular law makes this so.
Roberts re-wrote the law for the Dems who were too arrogant to believe their law, as written, would be overturned. Roberts’ only legacy is that he overstepped the role of the Supreme Court, violated his oath of office and became a traitor.
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.