Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Because, by his actions etc., he deserves and needs to be attacked. Is that not obvious, or do you think because he is black, he is immune for being responsible for his acts???
Because, by his actions etc., he deserves and needs to be attacked. Is that not obvious, or do you think because he is black, he is immune for being responsible for his acts???
What actions? Was it because of what he said in 1976?
"the government they devised was defective from the start, requiring several amendments, a civil war, and major social transformations to attain the system of constitutional government and its respect for the freedoms and individual rights, we hold as fundamental today."
What did he do wrong? Was it because he was a member of the NAACP?
Why should he be attacked? Is it because of the Brown vs. The Board of Education?
The article describes a strategy both parties use to evaluate the suitability of a SCOTUS candidate and get face time on tv.
Joe Biden is famous for is mini fillibuster like speeches given in lieu of probing a candidate's qualifications.
An evaluation for a lifetime position that impacts our laws for generations better be grueling. If that august body of legislators didn't go overboard they are not doing their job.
As for the author, his political indignation is, as they said about the introduction of the Batman tv series, "pure camp!" A meaningless piece of bias written to fulfill contractural obligations under a deadline.
".......insure that she toes the line......" Oops the editor fell asleep before finishing the article!!!!
Last edited by Kracer; 06-29-2010 at 01:33 PM..
Reason: after thought
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,329 posts, read 54,389,283 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by monkeywrenching
how low? not as low as the democrat party has ever gone or as low as the democrat party ever will go.
Seems to me we have yet to have a Democratic POTUS sink so low he was forced to resign and slink away with his pointy little tail between his legs, not so the GOP
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,329 posts, read 54,389,283 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregW
ubw - Declaring corporations to be citizens and protected by the Constitution is the biggest piece of Judicial Activism I have ever seen. Conservative indeed. Creating a whole new class of citizens with a Judicial descision.
But, but but.......................................
That pleased the NeoConfused so we'll just relabel Judicial Activism as the court doing its job
The instant Obama announced Kagan as his court pick, the massive effort to tar and brand her as a race biased, judicial activist kicked into high gear. Kagan clerked for Thurgood Marshall. The connection between the two was continually played up. Marshall was the court's consummate liberal, activist judge, and made no apologies for it. The aim was to hang the guilt-by-association tag of 'activist' in the waiting judge on her. Kagan takes great pride in her work with and mentoring by Marshall.
If Justice Marshall himself acknowledged that he was the "court's consummate liberal, activist judge, and made no apologies for it" then how could associating Kagan with Justice Marshall be considered an attack? Could it be that she desperately wants to conceal the fact that she is a liberal activist?
Quote:
"Justice Marshall's judicial philosophy," said Sen. Jon Kyl (Ariz.), the No. 2 Republican in the Senate, "is not what I would consider to be mainstream." Kyl -- the lone member of the panel in shirtsleeves for the big event -- was ready for a scrap. Marshall "might be the epitome of a results-oriented judge," he said.
Is not what Sen. Kyl said true? Did not Justice Marshall consider himself to be a liberal activist judge? According to the Huffington Post quote above, he did. Would not someone who seeks to emulate Justice Marshall be considered a liberal activist? It seems like a very reasonable line of questioning to me. Only those who are ashamed of their liberal activism could consider this form of questioning to be an "attack" of any kind. They aren't upset about Kagan being a liberal activist, they are upset that the American people are finding out that Kagan is a liberal activist. That is their dirty little secret they hoped to conceal.
ubw - Declaring corporations to be citizens and protected by the Constitution is the biggest piece of Judicial Activism I have ever seen. Conservative indeed. Creating a whole new class of citizens with a Judicial descision.
More than giving those protections to those at war with us?
Quote:
"Justice Marshall's judicial philosophy," said Sen. Jon Kyl (Ariz.), the No. 2 Republican in the Senate, "is not what I would consider to be mainstream." Kyl -- the lone member of the panel in shirtsleeves for the big event -- was ready for a scrap. Marshall "might be the epitome of a results-oriented judge," he said.
No. Kyl was a big supporter of the two members of the Court who actually are the epitome of a results-oriented judge: Roberts and Alito. He would have supported two more, Scalia and Thomas, if he had been in the Senate at the time.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The rabid dogs!
