View Full Version : Justice Ginsburg Hospitalize.
Looks like Obama will get to pick a new Supreme Court Justice soon.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/02/05/supreme-court-justice-ginsburg-surgery-pancreatic-cancer/
replacing a liberal with a liberal won't matter
Ginsberg was expected to step down during Obama's term, anyway.
Scalia is the one to watch. While reportedly in excellent health, he's not a young guy. If he has to leave over the next four years, it will dramatically change the balance of the Court.
Nathan_Bell
02-05-09, 17:52
Ginsberg was expected to step down during Obama's term, anyway.
Scalia is the one to watch. While reportedly in excellent health, he's not a young guy. If he has to leave over the next four years, it will dramatically change the balance of the Court.
Not just the balance, but also the readablility of opinions. His tend to be very concise and in some cases damned funny.
Lets not forget that we kept our basic right to keep and bear arms as individuals by one vote.......ONE vote. If just one justice voted the other way......there's not telling where we'd be today. I'm sure Obama would have used that as the green light to begin immediate and drastic gun control legislation.
You can't get any worse than Ginsburg in terms of a communist plant. At the worst, we'll get someone equal to Ginsburg. At best, we'll get someone not quite as left leaning as Ginsburg, but still left leaning.
At best, we'll get someone not quite as left leaning as Ginsburg, but still left leaning.
If they've paid their taxes! :D
rightwingmaniac
02-05-09, 21:20
you cant any worse than this:
1. Protecting Prostitution. Ginsburg had opined that several federal laws against prostitution “are subject to several constitutional and policy objections. Prostitution, as a consensual act between adults, is arguably within the zone of privacy protected by recent constitutional decisions.” In support of this proposition, Ginsburg cited only two cases involving contraception (Griswold and Eisenstadt) and one involving abortion (Roe). She further recommended that the federal laws against prostitution be repealed.
The right to contraception for married persons in Griswold was based squarely on the marital relationship — not something that prostitution is generally thought to promote. The extension of that right to unmarried persons in Eisenstadt invoked the right “to be free from unwarranted governmental intrusion into matters so fundamentally affecting a person as the decision whether to bear or beget a child” — again, not something generally thought to be involved in prostitution. And while the “right of privacy” that Roe relies on is entirely amorphous, there is nothing in its discussion that would appear to extend that right to include prostitution. Thus, the most natural reading of Ginsburg’s proposition that prostitution is arguably constitutionally protected is that Ginsburg had strong sympathy for that proposition.
2. Protecting Bigamy. Ginsburg had opined that a law restricting the rights of bigamists “is of questionable constitutionality since it appears to encroach impermissibly upon private relationships.” Ginsburg offered only a weak “Cf.” cite to Griswold and Eisenstadt in support of this proposition. But the marital relationship that Griswold celebrates is plainly the traditional one-husband, one-wife version: marriage is “an intimate relation of husband and wife” and a “bilateral loyalty.” And Eisenstadt speaks of the “right of the individual, married or single,” not of the bigamist. Again, Ginsburg’s constitutional argument is an extreme one that makes it most reasonable to conclude that Ginsburg had strong sympathy for that argument.
3. Abolishing Mother’s Day and Father’s Day. Ginsburg had stated, “Replacing ‘Mother’s Day’ and ‘Father’s Day’ with a ‘Parent’s Day’ should be considered, as an observance more consistent with a policy of minimizing traditional sex-based differences in parental roles.” I have previously parsed the question whether Ginsburg was proposing to abolish Mother’s Day and Father’s Day or was instead merely proposing that abolition “be considered.” Suffice it to say that, either way, hers is not a mainstream position.
4. Criticizing the Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts. According to Ginsburg: “The Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts, while ostensibly providing ‘separate but equal’ benefits to both sexes, perpetuate stereotyped sex roles to the extent that they carry out congressionally-mandated purposes.”
5. Urging Co-Ed Prisons. This one may be my favorite, as it starkly illustrates how far removed Ginsburg was from the real world: “Sex-segregated adult or juvenile institutions are obviously separate and in a variety of ways, unequal.… If the grand design of such institutions is to prepare inmates for return to the community as persons equipped to benefit from and contribute to civil society, then perpetuation of single-sex institutions should be rejected.”
6. Reducing the Age of Consent to 12. Ginsburg had recommended legislative changes that would reduce the age of consent for statutory rape under federal law from 16 to 12.
(The documentation for items 1 through 6 is provided here. See pages 69-71 and the specific recommendation regarding 18 U.S.C. § 2032 on page 76 for item 6.)
7. Requiring Taxpayer Funding of Abortion. Ginsburg strongly criticized the Court’s ruling that taxpayers are not constitutionally required to subsidize non-therapeutic abortions. (See Ginsburg’s chapter on the 1976 Term of the Supreme Court in a book titled Constitutional Government in America.)
8. Practicing “Limousine Liberalism.” Ginsburg had opined that an employer who had a manifest racial imbalance in the composition of his work force could be subjected to court-ordered quotas even in the absence of any intentional discrimination on his part. But Ginsburg herself, at the time of her Supreme Court nomination, had operated her own judicial office for over a decade in a city that was majority black, but had never had a single black person among her more than 50 hires. (Senator Hatch established this glaring inconsistency at the outset of Ginsburg’s confirmation hearing.
Like we didn't see this coming, and it being the main reason any sane person should have voted McCain.
However, we can do worse than Ginsburg...like a fresh young Ginsburg ready for 30 years of facist rulings.
As I've said before, the best thing to do for our political stability is send vitamins to all the justices until we get another Rep in the WH.
SC Justices are strange.
Powell was considered a moderate conservative yet was the swing vote of Roe v. Wade. Souter was actually labeled as a far right conservative in the mold of Bork, yet him and Stevens (labeled as a moderate conservative) are pretty much very liberal now.
Hate to say it, but I honestly think the best SCOTUS make up would be a few liberals, a few moderates and a few conservatives. Going to far in either spectrum could be bad. If your of the type that believes that the gov't should stay the hell out of your bedroom as a married couple, you have the Burger court to thank (Griswolde v. Ct). If you want the gov't to stay the hell out of your bedroom when your single thank the Burger court again (Eisenstadt v Baird). Yet if you think that its ok to be forced to work as many hours as ordered you can thank the Fuller Court (Lochner v. NY) that struck down minimum wages and other working conditions. Adkins v. Children's Hospital is another case in the Taft Court that said minimum wage was unconstitutional.
This is what I think about Ginsburg
The Enemy Within
by Marcus Tullius Cicero
(born January 3, 106 BC and murdered December 7, 43 BC)
"A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to fear."
Sttrongbow
02-06-09, 06:20
This is what I think about Ginsburg
The Enemy Within
by Marcus Tullius Cicero
(born January 3, 106 BC and murdered December 7, 43 BC)
"A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to fear."
It is very dangerous to start labelling ones politcal foes "the Enemy." A Republic consists of many political factions under one body politic. When we lose sight of that, we are no longer embracing republicanism (small r).
Nathan_Bell
02-06-09, 07:24
It is very dangerous to start labelling ones politcal foes "the Enemy." A Republic consists of many political factions under one body politic. When we lose sight of that, we are no longer embracing republicanism (small r).
The Left has used this sentiment to great advantage in their war on the Republic.
They are the ones who turned politics into a blood sport by working for decades to centralize as much power as possible in the Federal government, while claiming to be about individual liberty.
They are the enemy of the Republic. They are working to destroy the way the Republic operates. That is not republicanism.
rightwingmaniac
02-06-09, 19:33
This is what I think about Ginsburg
The Enemy Within
by Marcus Tullius Cicero
(born January 3, 106 BC and murdered December 7, 43 BC)
"A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to fear."
you a michael savage fan? hes the man. its a savage nation
rightwingmaniac
02-06-09, 19:36
It is very dangerous to start labelling ones politcal foes "the Enemy." A Republic consists of many political factions under one body politic. When we lose sight of that, we are no longer embracing republicanism (small r).
your ultra tolerance is the same ultra tolerance that caused rome to burn. hes right. they are the enemy. this isnt 1950.
you a michael savage fan? hes the man. its a savage nation
No I am not, IMHO Michael Weiner, his real name, is nut case. I strongly prefer Mark Levin www.marklevinshow.com or Rush www.rushlimbaugh.com
rightwingmaniac
02-07-09, 14:58
No I am not, IMHO Michael Weiner, his real name, is nut case. I strongly prefer Mark Levin www.marklevinshow.com or Rush www.rushlimbaugh.com
i like rush and levin also, but sometimes they dont put their pom poms down when the republicans shit on us. savage tells it like it is. he is not a cheerleader for either side. hes a true conservative independant. hes ahead of his time.
1) michael savage
2) levin
3) rush
4) hannity
in that order
From a complete "entertainment" point of view, I would pick Savage as well. But he is a completely unreasonable man who resorts to name calling at the first sign of any disagreement with what he happens to be raving about at any given moment. He hits the nail on the head 95% of the time, but he is a nut none-the-less.
Hannity is just a pot stirring, talking head, as is Rush.
IMHO, Dennis Prager has the best show on talk radio, all things considered.
I like Savage and Levinn, and can tolerate Hannity. We don't get Rush here in Lynchburg, VA, but by far my favorite show is Boortz.
The rare occassions I've heard Boortz and Glenn Beck, I liked them, but my regulars are:
1) levin
2) medved
3) rush
in that order
I also really liked drudge when I got him, and Praeger's O.K.
Hannity bores me and Savage is a populist, BTW.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.