Pssst. 3 of the 5 "so-called" Liberal SC Judges were Apponted by Repukes

[maxrandb]

Stevens - Ford
Souter - Bush I
Kennedy - Reagan

[bryant69]

1. There was a line on West Wing about this

"Appointing child judges and hoping they don't grow a concience."

But you call Ford a Republican around some Republicans and they might get in your face.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[Hugin]

2. Thanks for finally pointing this out.

There's not a single one of them who
represents the average schmoe either.

[ReadTomPaine]

3. There really aren't any liberal SC members anymore.

I miss Thurgood Marshall. He hung on as long as he could.

[ET Awful]

4. Another PSSST . . . Decisions that favor corporations over people

are NOT liberal decisions. This entire case was spurred by Pfizer and in favor of Pfizer. Catering to corporate interests isn't a liberal trait, sorry.

[NewJeffCT]

5. that is my worry about this decision

A small town's government is much more susceptible to pressure when the Wal-Mart's of the world come to town than would a federal judge, or even a state judge. How can Joe or Jane Councilmember that works a few months a year and gets paid $5,000 for their time stand up to them? Heck, Wal-Mart ($290 billion) could probably buy the town of New London with their petty cash.

[ET Awful]

6. Agreed completely. It's a dangerous decision, but far from a "liberal"

decision.

It sets a dangerous precedent that will cause a LOT of problems in the future. It's another step down the slope to corporatocracy.

[russ23]

7. "Another PSSST . . . Decisions that favor government over people"

Catering to corporate interests isn't a liberal trait but then again the interest for local gov't involvement to begin with is to benefit the government, not the business. Local governments do this to increase their tax supply in order to help the community as a whole... which is a liberal trait. In decisions like these made by SCOTUS, local governments appear to be just as greedy as local businesses. The more income they get, the bigger the salary raise they get to vote themselves. Liberals support bigger government while conservatives support bigger business, however, neither political sides support the SCOTUS ruling. This decision is only supported by the few in control of either the local government or the big business... maybe even some in the green party.

[ET Awful]

8. "Liberals support bigger government"?

Bull. One need but take a look at the massive expansion in government jobs, salaries and bureaucratic nonsense under the Bush administration to see who truly supports bigger government.

Sorry, but you're off base.

[russ23]

9. Bigger government does not always mean more bureaucracy.

You act as if all the tax money goes into one person's pocket. Having a Republican president does not make a change in liberal values nor does it mean all local and state government have automatically become Republican. More taxes means more money for the unemployed, handicapped, minority business, education, etc. If you oppose taxes for those purposes then I guess I am "off base".

[ET Awful]

12. More taxes doesn't mean bigger government. It means more revenue.

Local government of either stripe would not see the need to increase their revenue via taxation, etc. if the federal taxes had not been cut in favor of corporate handouts which resulted in reductions in federal funding to both state and municipal governments.

The myth that liberals favor big government is exactly that, a myth.

[russ23]

13. 'Bigger governemnt'

'Bigger governemnt' is of a vaugue political nomenclature. It can mean just about anything in today's terminology much like the term 'liberal' is from both the left and right wings of society. Obviously we view 'bigger government' differently. I see bigger governemnt as increased 'tax and spend'. You see it as more laws and bureaucracy. We won't agree on this issue.

As far the states not getting funding from the feds, you have a narrow scope of how that works. We don't need the federal goverment to be the 'middleman' between our income and our local needs. The original souce of that funding comes from businesses and people to begin with. Cutting federal taxes merely keeps the money in the states.

Whether or not the states and local governments want to continue getting that funding from it's orignial source will depend upon their loal tax policies. The federal government does not manifest money nor does it regenerate it from given funds. It only takes it from the states to begin with and then mandate how the states can spend it. Having a Republican controlled federal government, you should be happy that they let the states keep their money, so long as you have a Democrat state government. Otherwise, the feds will be spending your money how they want to.

[russ23]

10. 3 of the 5 "so-called" Liberal SC Judges were Apponted by Repukes

3 of the 5 "so-called" Liberal SC Judges were Apponted by Repukes...... and approved by a Democrat Senate... so they are both guilty of screwing us over.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

11. So by this logic I should love Scalia and Thomas?

WTF? I am sorry but this is ignorant. Just because you disagree with the decision doesn't mean that the guys who made it are flaming fucking right wing nutcases- just so you don't forget, 4 of the 5 here also voted against Bush in Bush v. Gore, and the 5th- Kennedy was the fence sitter who almost saved the election for Gore- but could not be persuaded at the last minute be Breyer and Souter.

Read the decision and try to understand it- they are preserving the authority of government, and keeping it local. Wake up and realize that large scale economic developments require a public/private partnership, and WalMart strip malls do NOT constitute the scale of development where ED would ever have to be enacted. Jesus fucking Christ, when Breyer, Stevens, Souter, and Ginsberg all agree on something, then you know it is good and sound. The goal here was to acknowledge that local governments must be able to act in ways they deem are in the best interests of the public good, and that they are the best arbiters of those decisions.