Taken for Granite > Rotting Corpse Takes Manhattan

Supreme Court Noms

(1/3) > >>

RottingCorpse:
I've been trying to follow the whole supreme court nominee thing that's been happening for the past couple months because, you know, the future of our freedom in America sort of rests on it.

Now, I didn't have too much beef with John Roberts. Sure, I wondered if anybody could be any more vague in answering questions, but it also seemed to me that the dude was doing his best to keep his personal feelings out of the whole affair, especially while being asked directly about those personal feelings. Anyway, my gut says the guy will be all right. He seems to have lived his life around the law and his personal philosophy seems to indicate that in his mind, law trumps politics. Yeah, he's maybe a little right of center, but close enough to center which with this president is going to have to be fine.

This Harriet Miers lady though . . . aside from getting the job due to a religious version of fucking the director to get the role, she's just not qualified. She's never been a judge. Sure, she was a lawyer for eight million years. (About as old as she looks, and she's supposed to be in her sixties right? Haggard, man. I'm willing to bet that not only were she and W "old friends" but they were also hardcore drinking buddies. The lady looks like she never met a bottle of Jim Beam she didn't dance with.)

Alos, isn't thae fact that folks on both sides of the aisle saying that she's teh wrong choice sort of telling here.

I really think Bush literally sits in the office and goes, "How badly can I fuck shit up?" before making any choice. Seriously, the guy's an anarchist in disguise.

nacho:
This illustrates the overall problem with the court.  Executive appointed, legislative controlled.  They're puppets, and always have been to one degree or another.  Funding should be fixed, not used as a punishment/reward system by congress, and congress should be both appointing and electing.  Executive should have no say so.  Does the largely-unelected executive branch deserve this much power?

Tyson:
Who *is* elected anymore? Prez, VP, congress, and your happy local government. That's about it. Same with laws and measures and all that. Only a small minority of those papers go up for vote among the public, which is bollocks if you ask me. As it stands, the fact that you only need to buy off a few hundred politicians to push retarded laws through is all too appearant. Shouldn't we be able to vote on the fucking broadcast flag? NooOOOooo. Your friendly special interests are doing it for you.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broadcast_flag

FIGHT THE MAN! SMASH THE STATE!

nacho:

--- Quote ---
and inability to skip over commercials

--- End quote ---


Oh, that's sweet of them.

So if they stop shows from being recorded, I'll have to wait and rip the boxsets.

RottingCorpse:
(I fixed some of my typos above.)

The direct democracy vs. representative republic argument will still be going on long after we're dust, Tyson, but I'm with you.

Nothing is going to change unless we enact serious campaign finance reform and, har-har, hardly any politicians want to even touch it because they'd lose the power to raise money to get elected.

Nacho's point is more worrisome. It can easily be argued that this is an illegitimate administration. I know, it's mostly a moot point now, but the fact that through his supreme court nominees, Bush will probably have a bigger influence on the future of the country than he does the present should raise concern. Any president is far more fluid than congress and I think it's safe to say that Bush acts more on personal philosophy than populism. Fine on most issues. He's president. They're his times to dictate. But the future isn't his, and he should respect that and think of what's best for the country.

Of course, I am remembering which president we're talking about here.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

Go to full version