← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · JoseyWales
Thread ID: 19094 | Posts: 6 | Started: 2005-07-11
2005-07-11 18:25 | User Profile
[url]http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050711/ap_on_go_su_co/scotus_hispanic_nominees[/url]
Gonzales as supreme court judge...I can hear the arguments already.
Democrats to America: This choice is horrible, he is a nazi and he will strip us of our rights and privacy
Republicans to Democrats: You dont support him because your a racist
Republicans to America: Which would you rather have, a "conservative" hispanic or a liberal white ?
Joseys reply to America: A shyt sandwhich and an empty plate should not be choices on the menu.
2005-07-11 18:37 | User Profile
JoseyWales
A Neo-Stalinist "Wetback." Remember Alberto Gonzales is one who thought up Gitmo prison camp and said the President can kidnap, imprison, and execute anyone in secrete without trial.
2005-07-11 18:48 | User Profile
I don't think either base, Republicans or Democrats, would be happy with that selection.
2005-07-11 19:59 | User Profile
**Conservative Litmus Test **
Many conservatives have forgiven or ignored Shrubââ¬â¢s liberal, multicultural and globalist tendencies over the last four years. The GOP faithful looked the other way as W wiped his well-heeled Patriot Act boots on the Bill of Rights because America was at war. Fiscally conservative Republicans hardly mumbled or grumbled as GWB supported and encouraged budgets that would have made Lyndon Johnson blush in shame, because HE was making the world safe for democracy. Constitutional conservatives stood in the corner as ââ¬Åtheir manââ¬Â ridiculed law-abiding American citizens as vigilantes, simply because they were trying to protect the sovereignty of our nation at the perimeter, a job that our government has failed to attempt in the last 30 years.
The scene is now set for the big litmus test of his presidency. Will George W. Bush betray conservatives and Constitutionalists in the upcoming ââ¬Åbattleââ¬Â for Sandra Day Oââ¬â¢Connorââ¬â¢s robe? On many occasions he has stated that he will not require that his appointments be anti-Roe, but only require that they are strict interpreters of the Constitution. Given Bush IIââ¬â¢s approach to seminal conservative agendas such as affirmative action, illegal immigration, fiscal restraint and individual liberty, we should all prepare for the worst.
Past Republican presidents like Nixon, Reagan and Bush I made judicial appointments that proved to be the worst kind of Warren-esque nightmares. These decisions were usually made to appease critics who accused them of being too conservative. Sometimes the appointments went horribly wrong because the men, or woman, were chosen for reasons other than their judicial background or legal acumen. Rumors are already flying that GOP leaders are whispering to the administration that he must chose a woman. Of course we all know that Bush wants to appoint the first Hispanic, and one of his drinking buddies (and anything but a strict Constitutionalist), to the seat.
Conservatives must realize that Congress has abandoned its Constitutional mandate to legislate in some of the most important areas of public concern. The Supreme Court has filled this vacuum, and as long as a liberal Supreme Court believes our Constitution is a ââ¬Åliving documentââ¬Â, it is but a meaningless piece of paper to be interpreted at will. If this president fails to alter the balance of power, conservatives will wait a long time for such an opportunity to present itself again.
Will Bush pass this test? Probably not.
Cobbtown.com
2005-07-11 20:05 | User Profile
Nice site, cobb.
2005-07-12 03:11 | User Profile
Gonzalas on the Constitution;
[url]http://www.originaldissent.com/forums/showthread.php?t=19080[/url]
:evil: :alucard: = :dung: