Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: Retiring Justice

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Wa, ,
    Posts
    2,769

    Post imported post

    This will impact everyone of us so even though OC is not mentioned, it IS ON TOPIC

    http://www.usatoday.com/news/washing...M_Exclude=Juno

  2. #2
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Olympia, WA, ,
    Posts
    3,201

    Post imported post

    Won't really. From what I understand he was considered in the lib camp anyway, and obama will put another lib there. The balance stays the same...

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Everett, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,339

    Post imported post

    sv_libertarian wrote:
    Won't really.* From what I understand he was considered in the lib camp anyway, and obama will put another lib there.* The balance stays the same...
    Exactly the way I see it.
    "A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity."

    "though I walk through the valley in the shadow of death, I fear no evil, for I know that you are by my side" Glock 23:40

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Eagle River, Alaska, USA
    Posts
    584

    Post imported post

    He was against DC V Heller so why would it matter if there's another constitution hating judge. I really don't know how they can assume what the framers thought when there are so many writings from them. The framers would want me to have a machine gun because they wouldn't want the government to have such an advantage over the people.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Wa, ,
    Posts
    2,769

    Post imported post

    All replies very true, however, one that is more liberal to the point of being radical is the concern I have.

  6. #6
    Campaign Veteran Right Wing Wacko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Marysville, Washington, USA
    Posts
    645

    Post imported post

    The only issue I see is that Obama will appoint a much younger and probably even more liberal judge to replace him. This means that we will be stuck with whoever the replacement is for many years to come.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    363

    Post imported post

    joeroket wrote:
    sv_libertarian wrote:
    Won't really. From what I understand he was considered in the lib camp anyway, and obama will put another lib there. The balance stays the same...
    Exactly the way I see it.
    yup.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Blaine, WA, ,
    Posts
    1,315

    Post imported post

    On the positive side, with Specter switching to the Dems, it becomes much harder for the Dems to move a judge out of committee. You have to have one minority member to pass a judge to the whole Senate for confirmation. Specter was generally that vote. Jeff Sessions now becomes the ranking minority member on the committee and he is much tougher than Specter. We might be able to block any radical judges and settle for a liberal in Souter's mold.

  9. #9
    Regular Member Prophet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    544

    Post imported post

    Souter is a scumbag anyways. Not because of his unconstitutional views on gun rights but because it is a long held practice that if you choose to retire you do so when the party that nominated you is in power. Souter was nominated by the first G Bush and Souter could have just as easily retired last year but he was banking on a democratic win for the big F U to the conservatives.

    I mean, Sandra Day O'Conner wasn't a conservative darling but at least she returned the favor to the party that nominated her in the 80's.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Eagle River, Alaska, USA
    Posts
    584

    Post imported post

    This whole problem we're having today stems from our two party system, we need more variety if we are to keep liberty.

  11. #11
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338

    Post imported post

    A major problem is not the personal beliefs of the judges. Judges used at least pretend to rule constitutionally. Now there is no pretense on either side and they rule for their parties and both sideshave made unconstitutional decisions.

    I believe we need judges who will rule what is constitutional and disregaurd their personal feelings on the matter.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Taco-Ma, Washington, USA
    Posts
    309

    Post imported post

    FunkTrooper wrote:
    This whole problem we're having today stems from our two party system, we need more variety if we are to keep liberty.
    The only reason we have a two party system is because people are too lazy and/or stupid to do the research, the last election for president had no less than 12 parties available to vote from, but there were only a few on the ballot, you can write in whomever you wish, BTW.
    If you actually believe there is truly only two parties, you can also boycott the vote.

    When the **** hits the fan, ask yourself: What Would Bugly Do?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •