Scotus

R

Rusty Carr

Guest
Guys, the recent ruling concerning the inmates in Gitmo was split along conservative/liberal lines, 4/4, with Judge Kennedy, as is common, supplying the tie breaker. I believe Justice Stevens, a reliable liberal, is in his 80's, and thus, the next POTUS will probably have a vacancy to fill. When voting, try to remember how you feel concerning the court. I believe there is a clear choice, one that willl affect the court for years. Vote for the one that is clearly going to choose a justice who will feel as you do, because, that is the one biggest thing the president does to influence life in this USA. I am not woing to try and stir up a fight, nor try to suggest which one will do which, I believe the choice is clear. Thanks, Rusty in Ga.
 
I like Supreme Court Justices that do not interfere with State's Rights as when our SCOTUS overruled the Florida Supreme Court in 2000 and stopped its order for a recount! Some Conservative Federalism that was!!! I guess the idea of Activist Judges all depends on whether you like the result of their ruling.
 
If you vote for the moderate candidate, he -might- install a judge who will agree with little things like "banning sniper rifles."

If you vote for the "change" candidate, he -will do his best to- install a judge who will agree with little things like "banning sniper rifles."

If you stay home, then you're basically helping the "change" candidate.
 
The number of conservative congressmen in the House & Senate are going to determine these things. If there are allot more Liberals elected (it looks like this will happen) McCain's conservative policies will probably be blocked at every step of the way.

Since all presidents want to go down in history for getting things done he will compromise on anything and everything that is legislated which will end up being the liberal agenda. He has a history of caving into the liberals.

Every conservative judge he nominates for the Supreme Court and across the nation will be blocked by the Republicans and he will compromise so they will all end up being liberal judges.

This means that the lesser of two evils is McCain for president, but all the conservatives across this nation have to vote for every Republican or conservative Independent (that has a chance of being elected). The alternative will be that congress will have the votes to over rule "EVERYTHING" that the president vetoes.

As it looks right now is that "Doom and Gloom" is on the horizon.

gt40
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Mr. D.

I'm not going to bite on that one. If I wwere to go into that whole "SCOTUS" stole the election thing, we would br right back on the verge of losing this forum. I was merely pointing out indisputable facts, and trying reminding people of the major issue(in my mind) in this election. Nice try, but I don't think I will bite, Rusty in Ga.
 
Heck, Rusty, the fellow sounds a lot like my brother, who keeps trying to convince me of the genius of a fellow who managed to flunk out of several programs, including divinity school and law school, and who managed to score Ds and Cs in undergrad science classes...

In fact, one could compare his GPA, from Harvard, against another public figure's, from Yale, and then go on to insist that the individual who the media has branded as being one step removed from idiocy is significantly smarter.

The one handicap which the Yale graduate has, which his sensitive and politically correct detractors cheerfully make fun of, is a speech impediment - a stutter - which he's managed to beat into submission. But it's still there, and he's still fighting it. When one takes that into account, his skill at public speaking, or lack thereof, becomes understood. I guess it's okay to make fun of -some- handicapped folks...

The media determines how many folks think these days. You tell someone something often enough, they start to accept it as fact. We're going to have this thrown at us by the media until we cheerfully and agreeably vote to lose our rights.

Remember too that not everyone who posts on gun-related forums is one of us - If one wants to skew or negate "the NRA's internet factor," it would be fairly simple to sow seeds of discontent... The primary messages I see is "none of the above," "don't vote," or "just stay home."

Reform and "change" are generally an easy sell. I'm guessing that Hillary is rather miffed that the PR campaign she started seven years ago ("Anyone but an evil Republican") got co-opted... They're going to have a hard time selling tangible facts, but they don't need to. They're going to encourage non-Democrat voters to abstain. And they're going to use things like internet peer pressure to do so.

Next time you hear a "truth" on the media - "Everyone knows this..." - step back and think for yourself. Do your own research. Dig a little. You might be surprised.

And keep in mind that the "change" candidate has attempted to outlaw rifle chamberings which have also been used in handguns. And last I looked, a certain PPC case fills that bill.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ahh yes, Mr D. Never pass up a chance to grind your little ax.
The point to be made is, just like with Slick Willie, the "power behind the throne" ain't gonna stay behind the throne for long. Hussein has expressed his liberal re-discoveery of the touchy-feely 60's and we are still digging out from under those disasters. But more importantly, Mrs Obama has been very overt in her hatred of America, specifically white America, and I fear her influence on the liberal's strawman would be a disaster at a time when we desperately need a strong leader to carry us thru this time of world order change.
As Jimmy Carter proved, in this time of world terrorism, raw aggression, and desire for world domination, "let's talk and play nice" just doesn't get the job done!
The idea of being able to say "I voted for the first black American President" may be tempting to some. It might be their only reason for voting for Hussein. But if they want to be able to say "I voted for a black man that made one helluva good President", they are gonna have to wait a while. If they vote for Hussein, they might not get another chance to even vote.
 
Rusty Carr said:
Guys, the recent ruling concerning the inmates in Gitmo was split along conservative/liberal lines, 4/4, with Judge Kennedy, as is common, supplying the tie breaker. I believe Justice Stevens, a reliable liberal, is in his 80's, and thus, the next POTUS will probably have a vacancy to fill. When voting, try to remember how you feel concerning the court. I believe there is a clear choice, one that willl affect the court for years. Vote for the one that is clearly going to choose a justice who will feel as you do, because, that is the one biggest thing the president does to influence life in this USA. I am not woing to try and stir up a fight, nor try to suggest which one will do which, I believe the choice is clear. Thanks, Rusty in Ga.
Click to expand...

The privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion...

--The U. S. Constitution
 
Flash The Cash said:
The privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion...

--The U. S. Constitution
Click to expand...

In this particular case, it is the liberal Justices who were true to the Constitution. There was no rebellion or invasion.
 
Geez, and I just complimented you on the other thread about being able to tell one sided propaganda from proven fact! Well, I guess you fooled me! You even threw in the religious prejudice "Hussein" dig! Obama is lucky his middle name isn't "Adolph" because we know how you would run with that! His mother should have named him "Jesus" so he'd be a bonafide Christian to you! Geez!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
D

I wish the Supreme Court had not stepped into the 2000 election. Every indication now is that President Bush would have won Florida after every vote was counted, and re-counted.
Perhaps we would have had a more civil discourse through the entire period of President Bush's Presidency.....jackie
 
If the supreme court hadn't been involved, they'd still be counting... I think the strategy was to keep going until they had enough votes... by hook or by crook.

For a party that much so much noise about taking the high moral ground about certain things, many of their members are decidedly scary...

Remember my old S-10 pickup? The camo'ed Critter Gitter? Someone actually keyed it once (I guess they didn't like the bumper sticker collection).

Took me about 2 minutes, in the parking lot, to fix the damage.

Got some lovely hate mail the other day about one of my Hillary stickers too...
 
Oh no Mr D,

You are the propagandist. My post was clear and straightforward with no oblique inuendoes nor prejudicial adjectives cluttering up things.
Hussein is his given name you know. How would it be any more religiously provocative than Baraka? Not exactly Joe or Tom.
My BS detectors do work very fine, thank you very much. Thus, I ignored those snippets of yours about McCain. As I did the oxymoron about "thinking democrats".
Now then, let's keep the post directed to everybody. I'm sure they aren't interested in hearing us in some sort of cuss fight.
 
Rusty Carr said:
I'm not going to bite on that one. If I wwere to go into that whole "SCOTUS" stole the election thing, we would br right back on the verge of losing this forum. I was merely pointing out indisputable facts, and trying reminding people of the major issue(in my mind) in this election. Nice try, but I don't think I will bite, Rusty in Ga.
Click to expand...

Good, I wasn't trying to bait you. I don't really want to go there either! No point to it, right? You are right in that the election is the major issue.
 
jackie schmidt said:
I wish the Supreme Court had not stepped into the 2000 election. Every indication now is that President Bush would have won Florida after every vote was counted, and re-counted.
Perhaps we would have had a more civil discourse through the entire period of President Bush's Presidency.....jackie
Click to expand...

Absolutely right Jackie!! That's exactly the point. You'd think the Supreme Court would have seen that and respected state's rights. What is important is that everybody trusted the election more than who won. This country will survive any president if we trust the process and that includes Bush or Obama!
 
beemanbeme said:
You are the propagandist. My post was clear and straightforward with no oblique inuendoes nor prejudicial adjectives cluttering up things.
Hussein is his given name you know. How would it be any more religiously provocative than Baraka? Not exactly Joe or Tom.
My BS detectors do work very fine, thank you very much. Thus, I ignored those snippets of yours about McCain. As I did the oxymoron about "thinking democrats".
Now then, let's keep the post directed to everybody. I'm sure they aren't interested in hearing us in some sort of cuss fight.
Click to expand...

Thank you. I rest my case based on your post.

No cuss fights from my end.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top