| Welcome to The New Coffee Room. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Bush nominates Alito to Supreme Court | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Oct 31 2005, 05:11 AM (768 Views) | |
| Rick Zimmer | Oct 31 2005, 10:29 AM Post #26 |
|
Fulla-Carp
|
But, my friend, the Constitution is not a car. If the water pump is bad, it is bad. No one needs to interpret it. It just is. But you yourself have just set down a specific judicial philosophy you want judges to follow in their intepretation. Hence, you want them to be judicial activitists for your point of view. You cannot have it both ways. Either you accept interpretation based on personal philosophy (judicial activism) or you say the words stand exactly as they were written, which throws out the entire concept of judicial review itself! |
| [size=4]Violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul -- Benedict XVI[/size] | |
![]() |
|
| Mark | Oct 31 2005, 10:33 AM Post #27 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
As I see it, the SCOTUS has been full of activism mainly for big government and mostly left-wing initiatives for so long that we need a little "right" activism to counter the damage that has been done. [DREAM] Then, the democratic party will fail. The Libertarians will take their their place and the true battle for what is correct will take place. [/DREAM] |
|
___.___ (_]===* o 0 When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells | |
![]() |
|
| Rick Zimmer | Oct 31 2005, 10:35 AM Post #28 |
|
Fulla-Carp
|
Let's get real, Thumps. Bush responded to the right's spanking him for Miers from a position of chastised weakness. The naughty boy now doing what he is told to do. This most definitely IS the right's nominee. Bush was just the tool that allowed himself to be used. Had this been Bush's nominee, he would have nominated him instead of Miers. |
| [size=4]Violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul -- Benedict XVI[/size] | |
![]() |
|
| ivorythumper | Oct 31 2005, 10:37 AM Post #29 |
|
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
|
Rick: Do see ANY difference between a judge who intends to use "judicial restraint" as part of his judicial philosophy and one who decides that there are "emanating penumbra" as part of his judicial philosophy? |
| The dogma lives loudly within me. | |
![]() |
|
| Steve Miller | Oct 31 2005, 10:41 AM Post #30 |
|
Bull-Carp
|
Alito is another Catholic! How many will this make on the court - 4? t'will be interesting to see if any of the Evangelical mouthpieces badmouth his nomination on that basis. There has been much bad blood there in the past, and Dobson did SO want to see an Evangelical in there. |
|
Wag more Bark less | |
![]() |
|
| Rick Zimmer | Oct 31 2005, 10:45 AM Post #31 |
|
Fulla-Carp
|
Not really. They are just different words to do the same thing -- apply their own personal opinions to the cases before them. Do you oppose judicial review, thumps? It is perhaps the most sweeping grab at power by any of the three branches of government in the entire history of the Republic. And it is mentioned no where in the Constitutioin. It is there only because of interpretation. Judicial activism at its best! |
| [size=4]Violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul -- Benedict XVI[/size] | |
![]() |
|
| Jolly | Oct 31 2005, 10:45 AM Post #32 |
![]()
Geaux Tigers!
|
Since when has the "Religious Right" become some monolithic boogeyman? Since when does Doctor Dobson nominate SCOTUS Justices? Get a grip, Steve. I appreciate the viewpoint that you are an equal opportunity Anti, which means that you can't stand whoever is in power, but donchya think you are starting to play silly booger with this line of reasoning? |
| The main obstacle to a stable and just world order is the United States.- George Soros | |
![]() |
|
| ivorythumper | Oct 31 2005, 10:46 AM Post #33 |
|
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
|
Rick: This past weekend I met with several people who work with Bush, or have in the past, or hold high level positions in the legal academy (including one dean of a conservative law school). These folks I would suspect have much greater access to the operations of the President, and are deeply concerned about the questions of religion, values, and governance. We spoke in depth about the Meirs nomination (she had just recused herself). None of them gave me any of the sense that you have. If you are privy to knowing what the actual process is, and how the events actually transpired, then please do let us all in on it. Otherwise, I have to conclude that this, like so many things that you insist upon, is merely your idle speculation and wishful thinking. |
| The dogma lives loudly within me. | |
![]() |
|
| Mark | Oct 31 2005, 10:47 AM Post #34 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
That would be cause for
|
|
___.___ (_]===* o 0 When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells | |
![]() |
|
| Rick Zimmer | Oct 31 2005, 10:48 AM Post #35 |
|
Fulla-Carp
|
I think it makes six, Steve, but I'd have to check to be sure. Just goes to show that all those conspiracy theories about the Vatican running things are true! The more important question is...was he Jesuit trained? |
| [size=4]Violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul -- Benedict XVI[/size] | |
![]() |
|
| Rick Zimmer | Oct 31 2005, 10:50 AM Post #36 |
|
Fulla-Carp
|
You expected them to tell you that Bush intends to capitluate to the demands of the extreme right? Naw, they weren't going to do that. But, the reality is he did capitulate. |
| [size=4]Violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul -- Benedict XVI[/size] | |
![]() |
|
| Jolly | Oct 31 2005, 10:50 AM Post #37 |
![]()
Geaux Tigers!
|
Your original premise is quite false. Enacting law from the bench is most definitely judicial activism. I see no indication where this gentleman is a judicial activist. In fact, it seems as if his opinions weigh heavily on the side of State's Rights, legislative intent, Constitutional integrity, and a bit of libertarianism through personal responsibility. Since when has this been considered a form of judicial activism? Sounds more to me like what a judge is supposed to do..... |
| The main obstacle to a stable and just world order is the United States.- George Soros | |
![]() |
|
| ivorythumper | Oct 31 2005, 10:58 AM Post #38 |
|
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
|
Do you see any possibility where a judge could do anything other than make a personal decision based on his or her jurisprudential sensibilities regarding the case before them? If you equate this with judicial activism, then I'll have to vote for Wonderland. As far as judicial review, do you think Marbury vs Madison was erroneous? How can you enforce Article VI without granting judicial review (which was already an established point of legal order in both British Common Law and some of the State constitutions) once you allow for Article III? Again, if you think judicial review under MvM is some sort of "emanating penubrum", or that you place both these on the same level, I'd vote again for Wonderland. |
| The dogma lives loudly within me. | |
![]() |
|
| Steve Miller | Oct 31 2005, 10:59 AM Post #39 |
|
Bull-Carp
|
Naw- you missed my point. The operative word is "mouthpieces" It's a comment on how Dobson, Falwell, Robertson et. al have appointed themselves as the voice of the Christian right, and how W has annointed them as such. As Larry pointed out in another thread (and I think you commented as well) none of these guys represents any more than their own view - and their own pocket book. Even if they object to a Catholic being nominted, I can't imagine that the average Evangelical would. Then again they are your mouthpieces - what do you think?
|
|
Wag more Bark less | |
![]() |
|
| ivorythumper | Oct 31 2005, 11:00 AM Post #40 |
|
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
|
OK, you obviously know better than my friends do, and that in private conversations they would intentionally mislead me. Of course, everyone else HAS to be a liar so that you are right. |
| The dogma lives loudly within me. | |
![]() |
|
| Steve Miller | Oct 31 2005, 11:02 AM Post #41 |
|
Bull-Carp
|
More important yet - when they finally get prayer put back in to the public schools, will it involve Rosary beads? |
|
Wag more Bark less | |
![]() |
|
| JBryan | Oct 31 2005, 11:08 AM Post #42 |
![]()
I am the grey one
|
Rick is simply applying Red Queen logic to the term "judical activism". |
|
"Any man who would make an X rated movie should be forced to take his daughter to see it". - John Wayne There is a line we cross when we go from "I will believe it when I see it" to "I will see it when I believe it". Henry II: I marvel at you after all these years. Still like a democratic drawbridge: going down for everybody. Eleanor: At my age there's not much traffic anymore. From The Lion in Winter. | |
![]() |
|
| Rick Zimmer | Oct 31 2005, 11:12 AM Post #43 |
|
Fulla-Carp
|
So, give me an example of enacting laws from the bench that is not explained by the same judges as simply interpreting the Constitution? It's all the same thing, Jolly. You on the right just do not want to admit that conservative judges are doing the same as liberal judges -- the only difference is they are interpreting the Constitution the way you want it interpreted. So, do you oppose the most eggregious example of judicial activism, Jolly? Do you oppose judicial review? |
| [size=4]Violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul -- Benedict XVI[/size] | |
![]() |
|
| Jack Frost | Oct 31 2005, 11:16 AM Post #44 |
|
Bull-Carp
|
He seems well qualified and should be confirmed unless there is some dirt that comes out. Not the guy I would have picked, but then I didn't get elected President. jf |
| |
![]() |
|
| QuirtEvans | Oct 31 2005, 11:26 AM Post #45 |
|
I Owe It All To John D'Oh
|
The left might pick a fight here. It would be a mistake, but they might do it. |
| It would be unwise to underestimate what large groups of ill-informed people acting together can achieve. -- John D'Oh, January 14, 2010. | |
![]() |
|
| Steve Miller | Oct 31 2005, 11:29 AM Post #46 |
|
Bull-Carp
|
I agree. |
|
Wag more Bark less | |
![]() |
|
| Rick Zimmer | Oct 31 2005, 11:52 AM Post #47 |
|
Fulla-Carp
|
On what basis do you find him qualified, Jack? Simply because he has experience as a judge? Or is there more? If it is simply that he has experience as a judge, why do we need hearings? Why not just a resume? Don't the people, through the Senate, have the right to review his philosophy and decide whether it is acceptable as they do with most or unacceptable as they did with Bork? I am not sure how anyone can decide this guy is qualified at this point, unless they simply are viewing this through ideological glasses. |
| [size=4]Violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul -- Benedict XVI[/size] | |
![]() |
|
| ivorythumper | Oct 31 2005, 11:55 AM Post #48 |
|
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
|
I am not sure how anyone can decide this guy is unqualified at this point, unless they simply are viewing this through ideological glasses. After all, he has already made it through a round of Senate approvals for his 3rd Circuit appointment. |
| The dogma lives loudly within me. | |
![]() |
|
| JBryan | Oct 31 2005, 12:05 PM Post #49 |
![]()
I am the grey one
|
I don't recall Ginsberg's or Breyer's "philosophy" being placed under a microscope. |
|
"Any man who would make an X rated movie should be forced to take his daughter to see it". - John Wayne There is a line we cross when we go from "I will believe it when I see it" to "I will see it when I believe it". Henry II: I marvel at you after all these years. Still like a democratic drawbridge: going down for everybody. Eleanor: At my age there's not much traffic anymore. From The Lion in Winter. | |
![]() |
|
| Jolly | Oct 31 2005, 12:06 PM Post #50 |
![]()
Geaux Tigers!
|
What I support is legislative intent. One man, one vote. Representative democracy, a functional republic. I believe our Founding Fathers were quite wise in letting elected bodies enact the laws that govern us, since this lends itself to inertia, except in times of crisis. Inertia in lawmaking is not a bad thing...yes, sometimes it precludes us from doing the "right thing", but it mostly keeps us from hastily lurching into the wrong. Ruling by judicial fiat is more akin to dictatorship, or monarchy, two forms of government which we hopefully will never experience... |
| The main obstacle to a stable and just world order is the United States.- George Soros | |
![]() |
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · The New Coffee Room · Next Topic » |









12:40 AM Jul 11