|
Post by gyeonghwa on Dec 19, 2011 12:54:24 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Yla on Dec 19, 2011 13:01:51 GMT -5
I don't.
|
|
|
Post by brendanrizzo on Dec 19, 2011 13:53:39 GMT -5
The man is delusional. He doesn't even know how the government works, and yet he is running for President?
|
|
|
Post by Vene on Dec 19, 2011 14:11:10 GMT -5
The man is delusional. He doesn't even know how the government works, and yet he is running for President? You need to realize, this man was Speaker of the House in the late 90s. I'm not convinced it's so much that he doesn't know how government works as much as he just doesn't care.
|
|
|
Post by rookie on Dec 19, 2011 14:39:56 GMT -5
The man is delusional. He doesn't even know how the government works, and yet he is running for President? You need to realize, this man was Speaker of the House in the late 90s. I'm not convinced it's so much that he doesn't know how government works as much as he just doesn't care. I don't think it's even that he doesn't care. I think he's just trying to say what he thinks he needs to say to win over "popular" support. I refuse to believe he's as dumb as to say this and really believe it would happen. Or even if he would want it to happen (which would set precedence for liberal dems to ignore conservative judgements). That's just my couple cents though.
|
|
D Laurier
Full Member
Paying for cable (or satalite) TV, is like hiring sombody to projectile poop all over your brain
Posts: 196
|
Post by D Laurier on Dec 19, 2011 15:14:21 GMT -5
Gingrich would scream for security if Jesus walked into his church.
|
|
|
Post by cestlefun17 on Dec 19, 2011 15:34:21 GMT -5
When liberals get outraged about a judicial decision (e.g. Citizens United) they don't throw temper-tantrums and threaten to abolish a co-equal branch of government that is part of an intricate system of checks and balances crafted by the Founding Fathers the conservatives supposedly revere. They advocate for change through the proper channels, i.e. proposing constitutional amendments. You would think that after a while the conservatives would get tired of their foot-stomping, and stop and realize that, after a good mix of Republican and Democratic presidents in which Republicans had the major advantage in terms of judicial appointments ( www.uscourts.gov/JudgesAndJudgeships/Viewer.aspx?doc=/uscourts/JudgesJudgeships/docs/apptsbypres.pdf*), perhaps the Constitution just plain doesn't conform to their simpleminded, hateful, narrow worldview? *The oldest currently serving federal judge was appointed by President Kennedy ( www.nytimes.com/2010/09/17/us/17judge.html. I can't find stats on how many of each President's appointees is still serving, but I think it is safe to ignore everything before Nixon on that chart.
|
|
|
Post by ironbite on Dec 19, 2011 17:38:15 GMT -5
Wow. That's some special stupid right there.
Ironbite-so glad he's not going to get the nom but god damn that's stupid.
|
|
|
Post by Thejebusfire on Dec 19, 2011 17:46:03 GMT -5
It doesn't matter if it's "popular opinion" or not as long as it's supports the constitution.
|
|
|
Post by N. De Plume on Dec 19, 2011 21:12:08 GMT -5
Arresting a judge you disagree with? Sounds like it’s right up there with the rest of the police state shit going on.
|
|
|
Post by lisamariefan on Dec 19, 2011 21:28:00 GMT -5
Doesn't he realize that doing things like this would kind of defeat the purpose of having judges?
|
|
|
Post by tgrwulf on Dec 19, 2011 21:55:04 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by itachirumon on Dec 19, 2011 22:00:15 GMT -5
It doesn't matter if it's "popular opinion" or not as long as it's supports the constitution. Oh Newt, I know you're sad your sister started dating that black guy after anti-miscegnation laws were abolished but... its time to let it GO dude. Common, its not healthy. You'll give yourself ulcers. We're worried about you Newt, you appear to be like a dingleberry on the ass of the tea party, it's just bad dude. You need to find some respect for yourself...maybe settle down with a nice gir....work on your bedside man... not divorce them on their deathbeds.
|
|
|
Post by askold on Dec 20, 2011 10:31:20 GMT -5
So let me get this straight, his problem is with judges who actually do what the laws say instead of just doing what the popular opinion would want.
Laws are also decided by popular opinion (in a democracy you can change all the laws -and even the constitution- by politics. Sure you would need to have pretty much all the votes if you want to do radical changes but it is possible.)
So why go after the judges? Shouldn't he declare that he will change the laws so that they will be what the "will of the people want?"
possibility 1: He knows that his side is not in the majority (Or atleast don't have a big enough majority to change the laws.) so instead of doing things the "legal" way he proposes to ignore the laws (and propably do all kinds of unconstitutional things in process) do fulfill his objectives.
Possibility 2: He is an idiot and does not know how a legal system, a country, and the constitution work.
|
|
|
Post by brendanrizzo on Dec 20, 2011 14:20:41 GMT -5
I bet good money on Possibility 1, Askold. The Republicans at the current time are all evil fascists who will make the USA fascist as soon as they get the chance.
|
|