The Supreme Court first has to decide whether to rule...sm
Posted By: oldtimer on 2008-11-26
In Reply to: I need just one - - The Supreme Court
on the case. They do not hear every case presented to them. They are very likely to send it back to the lower court if they think it is frivolous.
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
Supreme Court
I think a huge issue people may not realize is that within the next president's term, the probability is that THREE to SIX of the Supreme Court justices will be retiring.
The next president will be able to place a significant number of justices, and they will be in place until they retire or die.
That makes the presidential race all the more important.
I, for one, don't want Obama stacking the deck, so to speak, with people who share his 'you're not alive until I SAY you're alive' view of life.
For me, this was the most profound part of the article:
"For Obama, whether or not a temporarily-alive-outside-the-womb little girl is a "person" entitled to constitutional rights is not determined by her humanity, her age or even her place in space relative to her mother's uterus. It is determined by a whether a doctor has been trying to kill her."
I saw an interview with a young woman once who had survived abortion, though it did leave her with lifelong disabilities. She would not have been alive at all if it weren't for a nurse pulling her out of the trash. That's as sorry a state of affairs as I can imagine.
It already is going to Supreme Court -
I hope this time it wins.
Supreme Court Ruling.
I almost fainted when I read ***Supreme Court Finds Bush Overstepped his Authority** in relation to the military tribunals. This being a very conservative court with 2 Bush appointees I have just felt that whatever was on the table would have a conservative outcome. I am shocked. What does anyone else think?
Supreme court lost their
credibility in the Bush/Gore recount.
The Supreme Court won't stop him for much longer.
Thate 5-3 decision would have been a 5-4 decision, had Roberts not recused himself from ruling due to his prior ruling in the case at a lower court.
Alito and Roberts are Bush loyalists who will vote in his favor every time. Same with Scalia and Thomas.
Justice John Paul Stevens, who wrote the majority opinion, is 86. This means there is a very good chance that Bush will have the opportunity to appoint a third Supreme Court Justice, thus negatively tipping and fixing the scales of justice for decades to come, long after Bush is gone. Some radical right-wingers (including Ann Coulter) have publicly called for the assassination of a Supreme Court Justice, and Pat Robertson has been *praying* for another Bush appointment. If/when that happens, freedom as we know it in the United States will be gone for generations.
In the meantime, the current Supreme Court ruling won't mean much. They're already talking about creating a law to make Bush's tactics legal.
Not that even THAT would matter much. Bush hasn't agreed with Congress' laws 750 times since he's been in office, and he's issued *signing statements* allowing him to ignore the law.
He apparently views himself as having expanded Presidential powers in a time of war. Maybe that's a large part of the true reason we're at war with Iraq.
Actually, it was the Ohio State Supreme court, not...
the Supreme Court of the United States. That was then appealed to the 6th US Circuit Court of Appeals, who upheld the state supreme court ruling.
I guess that puts you and Sarah on about the same footing as far as the Supreme court?
Just asking.
if it were a "Dead Horse" the Supreme Court ...sm
would not be still considering it further, which they are. Perhaps that should be your first dose of reality.
You're right about the Supreme Court decision,...
but I have to wonder if it's just a nice little motto, why do so many who seek to remove anything even appearing religious from the government or anything to do with the government still look at that dollar with In God We Trust and scream separation of church and state? If there's no religious meaning anymore, why the arguments?
JMHO, there is still religious meaning to those who are religious and everyone except the Supreme Court knows that. I agree that religion doesn't belong in the government, but only in the sense that government shouldn't be involved in matters of religion, such as where we can pray, whether or not I can say Merry Christmas without offending anyone, what church I can attend, or which God I pray to.
Obama has never made an appointment to the supreme court
You need to be contacting your republican representatives.
I guess you're smarter than the supreme court....
nm
Obama Picks Sotomayor for Supreme Court
May 26, 2009, 8:15 am
Obama Chooses Sotomayor for Supreme Court Nominee
By Jeff Zeleny
Ron Jordan Natoli Studio/U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, via Associated Press
U.S. Appeals Court Judge Sonia Sotomayor. President Obama will nominate Judge Sonia Sotomayor of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit as his first appointment to the court, officials said Tuesday, and has scheduled an announcement for 10:15 a.m. at the White House.
If confirmed by the Democratic-controlled Senate, Judge Sotomayor, 54, would replace Justice David H. Souter to become the second woman on the court and only the third female justice in the history of the Supreme Court. She also would be the first Hispanic justice to serve on the Supreme Court.
Conservative groups reacted with sharp criticism on Tuesday morning. “Judge Sotomayor is a liberal judicial activist of the first order who thinks her own personal political agenda is more important than the law as written,” said Wendy E. Long, counsel to the Judicial Confirmation Network. “She thinks that judges should dictate policy, and that one’s sex, race, and ethnicity ought to affect the decisions one renders from the bench.”
The president reached his decision over the long Memorial Day weekend, aides said, but it was not disclosed until Tuesday morning when he informed his advisers of his choice less than three hours before the announcement was scheduled to take place.
Mr. Obama telephoned Judge Sotomayor at 9 p.m. on Monday, officials said, advising her that she was his choice to fill the Supreme Court vacancy. Later Monday night, Mr. Obama called the three other finalists — Judge Diane P. Wood of Chicago, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano and Solicitor General Elena Kagan — to inform them that he had selected Judge Sotomayor.
White House officials worked into the night to prepare for the announcement, without knowing who it would be.
Judge Sotomayor has sat for the last 11 years on the federal appeals bench in Manhattan. As the top federal appeals court in the nation’s commercial center, the court is known in particular for its expertise in corporate and securities law. For six years before that, she was a federal district judge in New York.
In what may be her best-known ruling, Judge Sotomayor issued an injunction against major league baseball owners in April 1995, effectively ending a baseball strike of nearly eight months, the longest work stoppage in professional sports history, which had led to the cancellation of the World Series for the first time in 90 years.
Born in the Bronx on June 23, 1954, she was diagnosed with diabetes at the age of 8. Her father, a factory worker, died a year later. Her mother, a nurse at a methadone clinic, raised her daughter and a younger son on a modest salary.
Judge Sotomayor graduated from Princeton University summa cum laude in 1976 and and attended Yale Law School, where she was an Editor of the Yale Law Journal. She spent five years as a prosecutor with the Manhattan district attorney’s office before entering private practice.
But she longed to return to public service, she said, inspired by the “Perry Mason” series she watched as a child. In 1992, Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan recommended the politically centrist lawyer to President George H. W. Bush, making good on a longstanding promise to appoint a Hispanic judge in New York.
On the Circuit Court, she has been involved in few controversial issues like abortion. Some of her most notable decisions came in child custody and complex business cases. Her most high-profile case involved New Haven’s decision to toss out tests used to evaluate candidates for promotion in the fire department because there were no minority candidates at the top of the list.
She was part of a panel that rejected the challenge brought by white firefighters who scored high but were denied promotion. Frank Ricci, the lead plaintiff, argued that it was unfair he was denied promotion after he had studied intensively for the exam and even paid for special coaching to overcome his dyslexia.
The case produced a heated split in the Circuit Court and is now before the Supreme Court.
Supreme Court will not take on BO's Birth certificate . Time for you to take action!
I stated in a previos post a few days ago that BO birth certificate case would not be heard by the Supreme Court. As many of you have said the judges and the Supreme Court are suppressing evidence as to the real situation that many of you do have extemsive, and true facts about. Clearly from your in depth knowledge about this situation, a cover up is occurring, not only by the Federal courts, but by the Supreme Court as will.
As in my previous post I strongly suggest that with the real evidence that you posses, that you most simplyt take action now, and save this country, not only ultimately disallowing Obama to be president, but to ultimately perform the ultimate patriotic duty for yourselves, as well as performing the highest civic duty that you likely will ever do in your lifetimes.
There is another current legal case in the works regarding this serious situation. Thus far the costs for persuing this matter are over $30,000 dollars. This can be found by doing a Google search, donations are badly needed, and if you people will make substantial donations regarding this, the higher the likelihood that the case will be placed in the hands of a federal judge.
The other possibility here is to start as a group, a collective case, pool your resourses to hire an attorney who speecialises in these matters, pay the retainer fees, the attorney's hourly fees regarding the case, and get the case filed in the Federal courts. The fees for doing this are not cheap, but you are MTs and make high paying salaries, so $20,000 to $30,000 should not be a problem here. Even the appeal process that is likely to occur is not out of your range as MTs, as it really only costs about double the amount of money to do so, as again the total expenses regarding filing an appeal would likely only be about $50,000 to $60,000 dollars,, and the beauty of the system is that if you are ultimately successful in winning the case, and you likely would be with the real facts at your disposal, the court costs are covered, and you would become true national hero's!!!!!
I don't understand that with the true information that you posses, why you are not persuing this instead of writing about on message boards.
With the true facts that you posses it is quite likely that you will ultimately win the case, would have completed the highest of civic duties, and will be held in the highest of esteem for finally exposing a person who has committed a terrible fraud, not only to the election process, but also to the federal judicial system, and ultimately going as far as perpetrating that fraud up to and inc;luding the Supreme Court.
I laud you in advance for having the fortitude for persuing this, and look forward to saluting you as well all of of the other American people, for performing the highest civic and patriotic duty that one ever could. It's people like you, that never give up, and get to the bottom of such an important situation. You are the true American heroes.
Supreme Court Rejects Obama Birth Certificate Case
Now, if we can just all survive until January 20, 2008, without another war or false flag attack on our nation, there may be some hope for the future. Until then, Bush is still President and still a very dangerous man.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/12/08/obama-birth-certificate-c_n_149229.html
July 2008 - I guess our Supreme Court was full of crap, too, huh?
July 2008
In a stinging blow to the Bush administration, the Supreme Court has ruled prisoners in Guantanamo Bay can challenge their detention in civilian federal courts. The ruling marked the third time in four years the Supreme Court has ruled against the Bush administration concerning the rights of Guantanamo prisoners.
I guess our supreme court doesn't know what it is doing with regard to the BIRTH CERTIFICATE
shoulda allowed Harriet Meyers in there......
Texas supreme court affirms special rights for religion
The Texas state supreme court ruled unanimously on Friday that a town which had altered its zoning to ban two church-sponsored halfway houses in a residential neighborhood was in violation of the Texas Religious Freedom Restoration Act.
That act, which was passed in 1999 and endorsed by then-Governor George W. Bush, affords greater legal protection to religious operations than to equivalent secular operations.
Under its provisions, cities have to prove that zoning regulations — like the one passed by the town of Sinton to ban jails and rehabs within 1000 feet of a home, school, or church — further a “compelling” interest, such as protecting public safety, and do not place a “substantial burden” on the free exercise of religion.
Town officials asserted that the zoning regulations placed no restrictions on worship or the practice of religion and were merely intended to protect the safety of residents. This position was upheld at the local and appeals court levels.
However, the all-Republican and generally conservative state supreme court agreed with Pastor Richard Barr’s claim that because the town of Sinton is so small, the regulation had the effect of excluding him from operating his “ministry” for parolees anywhere.
Barr’s case was argued by the conservative Liberty Legal Institute (LLI) and was also supported by the American Center for Law and Justice — founded by Pat Robertson — and by the ACLU.
LLI was involved several years ago in a widely-noted case against a Texas school district which its litigation director, Hiram Sasser, claimed had demonstrated “pervasive religious hostility” by banning the distribution at Christmas time of candy canes with a religious message.
According to Sasser, today’s decision “means that in zoning cases you have to give churches special treatment. … You have to have very special reasons for telling a church you can’t locate here and locate there. That’s going to be a touch burden for cities.”
“This is a home run,” Sasser proclaimed. ‘I think it will be a model for other states.”
New rule
Just saw on MSNBC they are polling Barack/Hillary agains McCain (who has the bigger leads). Of course they only show PA, Ohio, and Florida (the 3 states she did better in).
New rule - If they are going to show polls, they should show them for all states! Not just the ones where one candidate is doing better than the other.
Noam Chomsky, the supreme anti-American. sm
If someone told you that they supported Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge, would you think they were a great guy? He did, you know. There's quite a dossier on him at www.DiscoverTheNetwork.com. You might want to check it out.
Iran's supreme leader okay with vote count...(sm)
From his speech today: He also said if the demonstrations didn't stop there might be chaos and bloodshed, and that rival candidates calling for protests would be blamed. See link for full details.
This is going to get really, really bad.
This should help you decide
We haven't even begun to pay the piper - We can't afford it!
If you think it sounds extreme, it is. But if you do your own research, you'll hear his own words saying he'll literally bankrupt the coal industry. The MSM somehow "managed" to forget about this way back from January 2008! He said our electricity bills will "skyrocket!" This is disturbing! Right or left, the media has no right to pull this crap. They aren't even shy about their lovefest over this guy. This isn't journalism. There's a big difference between news reporters and commentators.
Our utility rates are already high enough. Why would anyone want to pay even one dime more? Someone please tell me their desire to do so. Google NE coal miners, etc., and you should find more info.
Good luck to you.
I don't decide..
God does. Come back to me when you can comprehend simple English.
I would think twice before you decide -
to proclaim you know who on this board is black and who isn't.
I'm black and I take offense that people like you will get on this board professing what race someone is or isn't.
The fact is you do not have a clue as to what the black communities would think is funny and what is not. There are some of us that would laugh and others who would take offense. Just like any white person who would laugh at certain jokes and take offense at others.
Maybe you should stop trying to pretend you are defending the people in the black community because you are doing a poor job of it and showing how much of a racist you are.
You have no idea what our communities or we are like.
Maybe you should stick to posting your propaganda and stop claiming to know what race everyone on this board is.
Hmm, protocol, rule of law,
Interesting concepts, pitty the administration you support has apparently never heard of them. So let's gut the constitution (no laws in there) so it suits you and your ilk. Outing a covert CIA agent isn't a felony, right? DeLay and Frist? They INVENTED proper protocol/rule of law/ethics. Telling the U.N. and the international community to take a flying leap also clearly falls within the parameters of proper protocol, rule of law, etc., etc. Boy, you might be on to something!
When asked what he thought of western civilation, Gandhi said something like, It's a nice concept. Hmmm...democracy, nice concept.
One Database to Rule Them All sm
Homeland Security, the Keystone Stasi, Now Tracks and Enforces Local Police Warrants
June 20, 2006: For many years, those working to create a total surveillance state have employed the salami tactic of taking away our freedoms one slice at a time. Laws that directly challenge constitutional rights, like the USA PATRIOT Act, are the spectacular exception. Agencies like FEMA quietly prepare plans for martial law, and have built a Shadow Government for military rule without need of a written order. The Bush administration for its part has constantly tested the waters, establishing new realities by fiat (as in its creation of the enemy combatant category to justify unlimited detention without charges), or floating test balloons like the Total Information Awareness program (which was withdrawn officially, even as the NSA's telephone surveillance proceeded to implement its spirit behind the scenes).
Now we must all realize that at some point, the salami runs out. It no longer makes sense to say that our government is creating a police state. The fact is, that state has arrived, complete with One Big Database and the establishment of universal jurisdictions. In an editorial published this week in New York Newsday, Ray LeMoine tells a memorable story of how he was detained by Homeland Security for several hours because of outstanding local police warrants relating to his sale of unlicensed T-shirts (Yankees Suck, among others). We dare not dismiss this as a minor matter; it shows that there is nothing about us in electronic form that Homeland Security does not know. Though he is clearly a believer in the official story of 9/11, LeMoine doesn't let his humorous tone hide the true meaning of his story: Homeland Security, the agency set up to combat terrorism after 9/11 has been given universal jurisdiction and can hold anyone on Earth for crimes unrelated to national security... erasing the lines of jurisdiction between local police and the federal state. If we do not fight back, the day when Homeland Security can detain people for being behind on their credit card payments is not far off. A national ID card with a chip of our complete financial, health and criminal records seems almost superfluous. Once again, 9/11 was a useful pretext for those who exploit terror to wage war on freedom. (nl)
We know that is the exception rather than the rule....
and I sympathize with your plight....however, it is acceptable to abort (kill) 1.2 million babies a year to cover those few who are resistant to all forms of birth control? Okay, so if we add women who are resistant to every form of birth control, women who have been raped or involved in incest, or life is endangered by continuing the pregnancy....that would still probably be roughly 25%-30% of all abortions performed. So why can't we legalize it only for those cases? Why do we have to use it as a relieve-all-responsibility oops form of birth control because some women/men take absolutely NO responsibility where sex is concerned? why can't we address the issues that cause 1.2 million unwanted pregnancies every year? Assign some responsibility? What is so terribly wrong with that??
And finally...why can't people admit what it is. It is killing babies. That is the choice everyone wants. To say it is a blob of cells or tissue is not accurate. And even if that WAS true, it is alive, and would continue to live and grow if it was not killed. If you have been pregnant you know at what stage you feel the fluttering of movement and there is no doubt in the mind of a mother who wants her child that that child is alive inside her. So now we are supposed to believe that it is whether the woman WANTS the child or not that determines whether it is alive?
Exception to the rule
You are so right. I think people are so blown away by Sarah Palin because she is a politician that actually does what she says. What a novel idea! How refreshing.
There's also talk that she won't rule out - sm
going to war with Russia if they invade Georgia. Just what we need, to be fighting THREE wars simultaneously.
And of course, don't forget the possibilities in Pakistan or Korea.
Fun, fun, fun.
Maybe it's time to quit MT and start selling bomb shelters again.
I think you are the exception to the rule then, and I...
commend you for holding feet to the fire. Would that there were more like you. Money hungry greed may have brought us here...but it was lack of oversight that allowed it. Some saw it coming, called it by name and were ignored. You seem to be opened minded to a degree and you have seen what McCain said in 2006. He described the situation we are in to a tee. He warned them, as did Allen Greenspan, as did John Snow. He had it right, and he was ignored. Say what you want about him...he had that right and the Dems on the banking and finance committee had it wrong. And because of that mistake, here we are. I would be much more willing to cut slack if they would own up to their part in it and strive to do better. But they STILL want to blame Republicans totally and accept absolutely NO blame. I'm sorry, oldtimer. That is dishonest and morally bankrupt in my opinion.
Not republican rule
It hasn't been republican rule for 8 years even though we do have a republican president. The Congress and Senate are democratic and they do not allow President Bush to do what he wants much of the time.
I wish there was a rule that the candidates HAVE TO
avoid them and go off in a direction of their own choosing. Especially when it's something they already said before. This second debate had me yawning.
Mustangs Rule!
Cool car; uncool carmaker!
there is for their family to decide ... and ..
apparently they did just that. What is right for them very well may not be right for others.
I just think it's a shame people won't let this go and focus on the issues!
Well, unlike some, I don't decide what to think...
depending on what the candidate I support says. If he is fine with it, that's fine. That is up to him. I would just like to see some integrity again. She knows she has a conflict of interest, she should take care of it herself. She should have turned it down when asked. Because that would have been the right thing to do.
It has nothing to do with protecting Palin. I don't think Palin needs protecting. In fact, I wish they would quit trying to make a 30-year statesman out of her and let her be herself.
Tell me...what have all these savvy politicians who look good on camera and are so articulate (except for the every other day size 13 in the mouth)...what exactly have those statesmen done for us to this point? Only get us in the worst financial crisis since the depression. The fact that she is so UNLIKE them is one of the biggest things in her favor so far as I am concerned.
And yes, if she was first on the ticket, I would vote for HER before I would vote for Barack Obama. In a heartbeat. Immediately. Wish I lived in Ohio so I could do it TODAY.
Why should any human being have the right to decide...
whether another is allowed to live? You honestly don't find a problem with that? What will your thought be when they decide that when people are not useful to society anymore they just be euthanized? It's legal in Holland; you can have grandpa put down. Don't think it can't happen here...because when you start to devalue human life, no matter what level that is on...you start down a very slippery slope.
You keep saying the government meddle in a woman's life...what about the baby? What about that life, who can't speak for itself, can't defend itself, can't run? Picture someone chasing a toddler around a room that the toddler can't escape from, slicing pieces off until its dead? That is somehow more palatable because it hasn't been born yet?? Sorry, Amanda...to ME that is the underlying question here. The VICTIM in all this is the CHILD.
That's tough to decide.
I like Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. Hate snow, afraid of volcanoes, and can't take heat anymore. Hubby has been wanting to move to Canada for years. He likes snow and mountains.
I also like Prince Edward Island, Nova Scotia. They're cold but I like the sea.
Maybe I can find an nice island halfway between the extremes I posted? Any suggestions? LOL
Why don't you let your kids decide for themselves
what they want to do. I'm glad I had responsible parents who taught me right from wrong, watched me grow, get married, but I also know that if I wanted to be gay they would love me still the same.
Unfortunately too many parents try to control every single aspect of their kids life, and the kids grow up as biggoted and unloving as their parents. Of course I'm not saying that is you, but you just see it too many times on TV.
Parents believe one thing, so they force their kids to believe the same thing, when all along the parents were pretty messed up.
You need to teach your kids on the different lifestyles people in America have and that's why it makes a great nation (or would you rather have the public floggings of gays like they do in the other countries because they don't share the same viewpoints as you). You need to teach your kids the different lifestyles and what it means as a lifestyle for them. Then let them make their own decisions as to what life they wish to choose for themselves.
You need to stop telling people to get a clue because you obviously don't have one.
Yes it is. That family off limits rule did not
nm
exception proves the rule
do that phase strike a familiar note?
Hmm. Under the last 8 years of republican rule, MY
being send to INDIA, PAKISTAN, and the PHILIPPINES. My pay is less than half what it used to be. I lost my 1-bedroom apartment and am now squeezed into a tiny studio. My car is falling apart. My 401K has had nothing added to it in over 5 years. My emergency savings is almost dried up. And now it looks like the MTSO I work for is just about to chip away at our pay once again.
Yeah, my hard work is being "rewarded" alright, thanks to the no-holds-barred, free rein big business has been given for the last 8 years.
I sure do hope McCain wins. I've gotten so used to having nothing but hot dogs and macaroni & cheese for every meal, that I just wouldn't be able to deal with the change if things ever got better. Plus with more of the same for the next term, I might finally qualify for food stamps. I sure wouldn't want to miss out on that opportunity.
And Prez who can't decide what he's trying to escape.
nm
I invite all to look at the posts, and decide...
who are the unhappy campers in this bunch. You are just a nasty little outfit, aren't you? who messed in your post toasties this morning? :)
Wow - if I couldn't decide before this has really confirmed it for me.
We watched C-span so that we could be assured nothing would be cut out. Then we went to MSNBC to see their comments and then FOX to hear their comments. Sure enough MSNBC was filled with a bunch of sour grapes. What were they saying about her speech? Nothing. They were just upset because she called the media on what they've been reporting about her and they didn't like it. They want to keep bashing and putting her down and have nothing said back to them. They are so biased it makes me sick.
This is my likes & dislikes about Sarah Palin. I like that she is not from Washington. I like that she has been governor of the state, has passed laws, has made Alaska a better state that works for the people. I like that she got rid of all the wasteful things (fancy jet, personal chef, chauffer). I like that she can stand tough when she needs to. She's knows how to get things done and she's not afraid to go up against the "big boys". I like that she firmly believes in the 2nd ammendment of the constitution, the right to bear arms, and I like the fact that she knows how to use arms. I like that she cares about America more than she cares about herself. I like that her husband owns a business and she has helped him work his commercial fishing business. So I know she is not for more taxes. I like that she took from the big oil companies and gave the money rightfully back to the people who deserved it (the Alaskan citizens). I like that she is a mother, has kids in school, has been to the PTA. That means she is aware of the education system and I like that she got involved to make the schools a better place for all kids. I like the fact that she and her husband decided to have a child knowing he would have down's syndrome and I like the fact that she doesn't wear it on her sleeve and when she talked about her baby tonight she said our newest addition, a beautiful baby boy (not a beautiful Down's syndrome baby). I like the fact that her daughter is pregnant. To me it shows she is as real of a person and her family is the same as most all other Americans and facing the same thing all other americans are. I like the fact that she was not born into a wealthy family, she worked hard to get where she is at. I like the fact that for all the snips and nasty comments the democrats said against her and John McCain last week she can dish it right back (and with facts! - which by the way is all the liberal media focused on tonight (how much she picked on the other side)). I like the fact that I know she and her husband sit down at night after their kids go to bed and they talk about real issues (his business, their kids schooling, etc etc). I think she is a wonderful, hard working person. Very knowlegeable about issues (has to be to be a governor). I like the fact that she does have more experience than Obama does, which because he is running for President he should have more experience then someone running for VP. Tonight after her speech DH & I both said we need to move to Alaska and have someone like her as our governor.
What I don't like...maybe she's a little too "religious" for me and I've heard that she wants to teach creationalism in schools. BUT (I wanted to make sure I put that in big letters...but) I can't confirm that and I'm not sure if that is a rumor put out by the liberals, so I really can't say I don't like that about her because I don't know if it's true. Just keep religion out of politics and I'm happy with that.
So far I can't see anything I dislike about her (which is a far cry from 3 days ago when I couldn't stand her because all I was listening to was MSNBC and CNN). Now I'm researching and reading more about her accomplishments.
I think she's a wonderful person and will make a fine VP. Also I do have to say I've been learning more about JM over the past couple days and I have a lot more confidence and respect for him as our next president. I loved R. Guliani's speech and Mike Huckabee's and the Governor of Hawaii (forget her name). They all gave fine speeches.
So that's my opion. To the one just blabbing about how our taxes are going to be raised, blah, blah, blah. It's all scare tactics. When the democrats are in is always when people pay more in taxes. Government grows, jobs go overseas, America becomes less secure, military gets cut way back Remember NAFTA because of Democrat Billy who shipped jobs overseas and people lost good jobs and homes. Then he turned around and created these "false" jobs where people had to take jobs paying 1/2 of what they were getting paid but because they paid them so low he could create more jobs giving a "false" impression that he created all these jobs (these people still had to go on food stamps). Remember how your taxes were raised because of Democrat Billy who jumped my tax bracket from 21% to 37% and even then at the end of the year we had to pay an additional $2500 cos we didn't pay enough to support all of his programs. Remember Kosovo, Somalia, etc. Remember how Democrat Billy gutted the military which made our country less safe, hence the first attack on the world trade centers. Remember how Democrat Billy had the chance to capture OBL but he didn't. Remember the lies. Remember how Democrat Hillary was trying to socialize health care. Some people may think Bush is "one fry short of a happy meal" but at least our taxes went down, and we had job security and our military was built up and I once again had faith in the country, Sure the country is not perfect. Sure President Bush has made some real "dufus" decisions and mistakes, but it's nothing compared to the mess the country was in the last time the Democrats were in office.
That is why I'm voting for McCain/Palin. I've got my fire resistant suit on. 
I haven't read it all yet, but you all can decide...sm
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/518/
http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/did_obama_write_that_he_would_stand.html
http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/o/obama-books.htm
http://www2.islandpacket.com/blogs/post/26929
I agree! I can't decide who to vote for because there is so much bad on both of them (sm)
I am going to decide who I dislike more and vote for his opponent. Very sad. Terrible choices.
the voters don't decide the election- sm
Perhaps you forgot, or don't even know, that it isn't the voters who actually decide the election anyway. It is the electoral college. We could all boycott (although that would be stupid beyond belief as our voices would not be heard at all) and it would not affect the election results anyway. Get it??
People who use their minds to decide what they do
*
It's not for you to decide what a woman does with her body
Mind your own business. Keep your own legs closed when the rapist approaches.
The rule is that you are requested not to slam on other boards. sm
Conservatives and liberals are welcome to post on each other boards if it is done with respect.
I agree. I think they should make a rule that a candidate...sm
can only talk about and show pictures or video clips of himself/herself, no opponents' names allowed at all. That would force them to tell us what their platform is and let us make the comparison.
Obama set to undo "conscience rule" sm
for healthcare workers who refuse to participate in performing abortions or dispensing birth control methods which disagree with their religious convictions. So now a woman's right to choose whether to abort her unborn child trumps a healthcare professional's right to adhere to their religious convictions? The article even mentions Catholic healthcare facilities as not being exempt, and we know how the Church feels about abortions. Unbelievable!!! 
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/28/us/politics/28web-abort.html
I love it...when the courts decide against liberals...
they are biased and wrong. When they decide for liberals...they are right on and good old boys. Can we just admit it...you don't care what the facts are. Conservatives are wrong and Bush is wrong...every time posting, every time opening mouth.
If Bush was a Democrat, we would not be having any of these discussions.
What a twisted value system. Twisted.
|
