[SpinyNorman]

The article speaks for itself, but you really have to check out his site. Look at the speaker list and the topics. I can't understand what relationship they have to the Constitution other that to subvert it.

http://www.americanconstitutionsociety.org/

[denydenydeny]

but it stripped a state of power to administer its own laws, the former first lady said.

Administer, not make up as you go along.

[chiefqc]

You can tell that lying, cheating, ugly, old, crusty as*hole that I could care less about anything her lying mouth has to say.

Her and her perverted, whatever she wishes to call him, have discrased this great country with their perverted, lying actions that it will be a long time to get rig of the foul smell.

She has done nothing for this great country except to cause it put up with 8 years of one pervision after another. She has stuck with her perverted husband, in name only, just to benifit herself. Their marrige is a joke and yet she exspects people to pity her and reap praise on her for sticking with pervert willie. I would call her stupid and a glutton for punishment.

The only relief we, the voters of the U.S.A., have to correct the abuses heaped upon us by our elected officials is to vote them out of office before they declare themselves elected for life.

In closing all I can say is:

"AMERICA, IT'S TIME TO TAKE OUT THE TRASH"

[clikker]

"In addition to installing an American president, the current Supreme Court has invalidated federal laws at the most astounding rate in our nation's history," Clinton said to applause and laughter.

Is it not possible that the Congress has been enacting more unconstitutional federal laws than at any time in history?

Perhaps, just maybe, the problem lies with the Congress for a change, not with everyone else.

[TommyDale]

"Clinton, a Democrat from New York, criticized the court's recent trend of 5-4 cases that have favored state power over federal control."

I guess the senator has never read the 10th Amendment. Too bad she feels the Constitution is unconstitutional. Thank God her husband did not appoint her to the Supreme Court! This woman is an imbecile!

[colorado tanker]

Hmmm. The ruling that voting rules in a federal election are subject to the federal Constitution is "judicial activism." I'd say Hillary is dumb enough to qualify for appointment to the Florida Supreme Court.

[Arkinsaw]

In the Florida case the Supreme Court should have turned the matter back to the Florida Legislature and let the Florida legislature determine who the Electors from the State of Florida would be as was their duty. A hot potato that the State legislature did not want, but in my opinion was their Constitutional duty to handle.

[craig_eddy]

"Perhaps even more disturbing than the court's impulse to defend state and local prerogatives is the selectivity of that impulse," Clinton told an audience of law students, lawyers and judges at the liberal American Constitution Society Tuesday.

You would think that an organization named "American CONSTITUTION Society" would be wise enough to know that the Consititution EXPRESSLY protects state and local prerogatives. Excepting the LIMITED duties extended to the "federal" government (today it's a "national" government), the "federal" government has NO POWER over the states. The "federal" government has NO POWER to tell a state what it's smoking laws should be, what it's affirmative action laws should be (and that they should exist).

If all power were vested into a national government, what need would there be for state governments? And where would one go if one were opposed to the dictates of that government? The founders created a FEDERAL government for a reason, and we need to bring REAL FEDERALISM back to this country.

[bigeasy_70118]

Conservatives have pointed to the civil rights-era decisions of the court under Chief Justice Warren Burger as examples of such activism.

Critics on the left have countered, as Clinton did Tuesday, that activism is often in the eye of the beholder.

While the court has the power to strike down federal laws, it has been historically reluctant to do so, Clinton noted.

The Warren court struck down federal laws in about 20 cases over 16 years, she said.

Uhhh, I think the Warren Court is in reference to Earl Warren not Warren Burger. What a dumsh-t the author is. Warren Burger (mmmmmmm Burger) was appointed by Nixon when he wanted to roll back the (Earl) Warren Court.

Nixon's transcripts on his SC appointments make for hilarious reading.

[maxwell]

"Perhaps even more disturbing than the court's impulse to defend state and local prerogatives

Yep... Uh huh... That says it all RIGHT THERE, folks-- Why We Should Fear Hitlery. She thinks that STATE and LOCAL PREROGATIVES are DISTURBING. Yep. Shake in yer lil' red shoes, America... My buds think I'm nuts to be so terrorized by the thought of a Hitlery presidency. They'll get theirs.

I swear, if the she-demon ever gets into presidential power again, God forbid, I am building me that bunker...

[skeeter]

Its just Yahoo News keeping the dream alive...

[DM1]

I keep asking myself Why oh why did NY vote for this anti-American flea bag! I was so disappointed when she won.

[votelife]

Dear President Bush, With the Surpeme Court session getting ready to close, it may well be time for perhaps the most important domestic decision of your presidency: the appointment of a Supreme Court Justice(s). The main reason why I supported you in 2000 and why I wanted Daschle out of power in 02 (and 04) has to do with the courts. I want America courts to interpret law, not write law. During your presidential campaign you said Thomas and Scalia were your two model justices. Those are excellent models. The High Court needs more like them. Clarence Thomas recently said to students that the tough cases were when what he wanted to do was different from what the law said. And he goes by the law. This should be a model philosophy for our justices. Your father, President Bush lost his reelection campaign for 3 main reasosn, as far as I can see. 1. he broke the no new taxes pledge 2. David Souter 3. Clinton convinced people we were in a Bush recession (which we had already come out of by the time Clinton was getting sworn in)

I urge you to learn from all three of these: 1. on taxes, you're doing great. Awesome job on the tax cut. 2. good job so far on judicial appointments. I want to see more of a fight for Estrada, Owen, and Pickering, but I commend you on your nominations. 3. by staying engaged in the economic debate you'll serve yourself well

I have been thoroughly impressed with your handling of al Queida, Iraq, and terrorism. You have inspired confidence and have shown great leadership.

But I want to remind you that your Supreme Court pick(s) will be with us LONG after you have departed office. I urge you to avoid the tempation to find a "compromise" pick. Go for a Scalia or Thomas. Don't go for an O'Connor or Kennedy. To be specific, get someone who is pro-life. Roe v Wade is one of the worst court decisions I know of, and it's the perfect example of unrestrained judicial power.

I know the temptation will be tremendous on you to nominate a moderate. But remember who your true supporters are. I am not a important leader or politician. I am "simply" a citizen who has been an enthusiatic supporter of you. I am willing to accept compromise in many areas of government but I will watch your Court nomiantions extremely closely. What the Senate Dems are doing right now is disgusting, but as the President you have the bully pulpit to stop it. Democrats will back down if you turn up serious heat on them.

Moreover, I think public opinion is shifting towards the pro-life position. Dems will want you to nominate a moderate, but almost all will vote against you anyways. Pro-choice Repubs will likely still vote for you if you nominate a Scalia, after all, you campaigned on it. So Mr. President, I urge you to stick with your campaign statements and nominate justices who believe in judicial restraint, like Scalia and Thomas.

Happy Memorial Day and may God bless you and your family.