|
![]() ![]() ![]() |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) |
![]() |
Stinky The Clown
![]() |
Sat Apr-10-10 11:24 AM Original message |
We will not be "retaining a liberal Suprme Court seat". |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
lonestarnot
![]() |
Sat Apr-10-10 11:25 AM Response to Original message |
1. Yes we do! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Richardo
![]() |
Sat Apr-10-10 11:25 AM Response to Original message |
2. I want a "a reasonable jurist who chooses to vote for what is proper, not what is political" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Stinky The Clown
![]() |
Sat Apr-10-10 11:28 AM Response to Reply #2 |
4. That might have been okay back in the day when the Supreme Court wasn't a rigged game. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
notadmblnd
![]() |
Sat Apr-10-10 11:39 AM Response to Reply #4 |
10. You know, it is possible to increase the size of the court? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Richardo
![]() |
Sat Apr-10-10 11:40 AM Response to Reply #10 |
12. Ask FDR |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
notadmblnd
![]() |
Sat Apr-10-10 11:54 AM Response to Reply #12 |
13. Roosevelt didn't succeed, but six others did. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Richardo
![]() |
Sat Apr-10-10 12:12 PM Response to Reply #13 |
14. The other six changes were not purely presidential initiatives |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
notadmblnd
![]() |
Sat Apr-10-10 12:39 PM Response to Reply #14 |
26. Yes, it has to be an act of congress of which we currently have a Dem majority |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Goblinmonger
![]() |
Sat Apr-10-10 12:25 PM Response to Reply #12 |
24. FDR did succeed, actually. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Sebastian Doyle
![]() |
Sat Apr-10-10 12:16 PM Response to Reply #10 |
18. Yeah, but don't expect anything like that from the current Congress |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Posteritatis
![]() |
Sat Apr-10-10 12:18 PM Response to Reply #10 |
20. Opening that can of worms in this political climate would be a bad idea. (nt) |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
notadmblnd
![]() |
Sat Apr-10-10 12:41 PM Response to Reply #20 |
27. why? the republicans have stopped pretending, why shouldn't Dems? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Posteritatis
![]() |
Sat Apr-10-10 12:51 PM Response to Reply #27 |
28. I don't care for the idea of enlarging the SC every time Congress switches parties. (nt) |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
cali
![]() |
Sat Apr-10-10 12:54 PM Response to Reply #10 |
30. it's not functionally possible. Not with this Congress. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Richardo
![]() |
Sat Apr-10-10 11:39 AM Response to Reply #4 |
11. I don't get it. A vote against the RW ideologues a vote against the RW ideologues |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
gkhouston
![]() |
Sat Apr-10-10 11:32 AM Response to Reply #2 |
6. +1. It's very telling that "a reasonable jurist who chooses to vote for what is |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Posteritatis
![]() |
Sat Apr-10-10 12:17 PM Response to Reply #6 |
19. The condemnation is the telling part there. (nt) |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
etherealtruth
![]() |
Sat Apr-10-10 11:28 AM Response to Original message |
3. All I ask for is a jurist ... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Liberal_in_LA
![]() |
Sat Apr-10-10 11:31 AM Response to Original message |
5. yep |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
blondeatlast
![]() |
Sat Apr-10-10 11:34 AM Response to Original message |
7. I want another Justice Stevens in that seat. One who rules form jutice, not |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Robb
![]() |
Sat Apr-10-10 11:36 AM Response to Reply #7 |
8. "Justice IS liberal." Spot on. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Richard Steele
![]() |
Sat Apr-10-10 12:16 PM Response to Reply #8 |
17. It's well known that FACTS have a liberal bias. nm |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
grasswire
![]() |
Sat Apr-10-10 11:38 AM Response to Original message |
9. Stevens is a demonstration of the shift in political labeling |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Sebastian Doyle
![]() |
Sat Apr-10-10 12:24 PM Response to Reply #9 |
23. Eggzactly! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
cali
![]() |
Sat Apr-10-10 12:56 PM Response to Reply #9 |
31. um. no. actually, he's changed a lot. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
customerserviceguy
![]() |
Sat Apr-10-10 12:14 PM Response to Original message |
15. Regarless of who appointed him |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Posteritatis
![]() |
Sat Apr-10-10 12:16 PM Response to Original message |
16. I want a reasonable jurist who chooses to vote for what is popular, not what is political |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Cleita
![]() |
Sat Apr-10-10 12:19 PM Response to Original message |
21. I would settle for the reasonable jurist who chooses to vote |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
defendandprotect
![]() |
Sat Apr-10-10 12:21 PM Response to Original message |
22. Stevens is a conservative Republicans emblematic of how far to the right politics have |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
cali
![]() |
Sat Apr-10-10 12:57 PM Response to Reply #22 |
32. Stevens has become far more liberal over the years. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
donco6
![]() |
Sat Apr-10-10 12:28 PM Response to Original message |
25. I want him as liberal as a human body can contain. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
cali
![]() |
Sat Apr-10-10 12:53 PM Response to Original message |
29. he can call himself a cockeyed robin but his later voting record on the Court |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Greyhound
![]() |
Sun Apr-11-10 02:01 AM Response to Original message |
33. Freakish how anything not completely batshit crazy is considered "liberal", |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Sat Sep 07th 2024, 06:46 PM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) |
![]() |
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate
About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.
© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC