Attacking the Supreme Court

Discussion in 'Law and Justice System' started by RetiredGySgt, Dec 4, 2007.

  1. RetiredGySgt
    Online

    RetiredGySgt Platinum Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    39,556
    Thanks Received:
    5,900
    Trophy Points:
    1,140
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Ratings:
    +8,972
    We have had several people make spurious claims against the Supreme Court recently. One made the claim that the court ruled 5-4 in favor of Bush in 2000, when the actual ruling was 7-2 on the question whether the recount was Unconstitutional. This same person made the claim the " conservative" court was responsible for allowing kidnappings of foreigners to be brought to justice in the US, when in fact the Court voted 9-0 in the case and then 6-3 in another part of the ruling in support ( the 3 dissenters were the Conservative members) and then this member, as usual ran away from the thread.

    Just curious how many times these people will get to lie and or be "mistaken" and never called on it. Allowed to slink away and later post the same "mistake" in another thread?

    Several posters have claimed the Liberals on the Court did NOT rule that local and State Governments can seize land and give it to others based solely on an increase in tax revenue.

    These people keep making spurious claims against the "conservative" members and when shown just how bad the liberals have ruled, vanishing from the thread.
     
  2. Larkinn
    Offline

    Larkinn Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2007
    Messages:
    5,598
    Thanks Received:
    174
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +175
    Incorrect. The court ruled 7-2 on the question of the way the recount was currently being done was unconstitutional. It ruled 5-4 on whether there was time to do another type of recount. Saying vaguely that it was 5-4 is no more correct than what you have done, which is vaguely say that it was 7-2. If you are going to insist on accuracy in others, at least attempt to have some accuracy yourself.

    The conservative (which it is) court hasn't allowed kidnappings of foreigners to be brought to justice in the US. Or at least they haven't said its legal. They merely said there was no private action. And the "dissent" was on a procedural posture, of the main claim they agreed with the majority. There wasn't actually any dissent, it was a concurring opinion.

    Those who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. Am I going to get an apology for the numerous times you've lied about me? Doubtful.

    Cite please?
     
  3. RetiredGySgt
    Online

    RetiredGySgt Platinum Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    39,556
    Thanks Received:
    5,900
    Trophy Points:
    1,140
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Ratings:
    +8,972
    Cite Please? You can not be serious? You have implied just that. But I forgot, your just playing word games. You think that is ok.

    As to the 7-2, the decision is the heart of the matter. Liberals have insisted it was a political decision based solely on party affiliation. That the Court had no business making any decision in the case and then claiming as proof a 5-4 ruling on the separate matter of whether time remained to conduct a CONSTITUTIONALLY sound recount. 7-2 the Court ruled the base claim, that the recount as ordered was Unconstitutional. So much for the spurious claim that only the Conservatives on the Court agreed with the base charge. So much for the SPURIOUS claim that the Court had no business making any ruling at all.

    Another poster insisted that the decision to not allow legal action by "kidnapped" foreigners was an outrage, again perpetrated on the people of this Country by Conservatives in the Court. A court that voted 9-0 on the question.

    Go ahead, try and twist it anyway you please. The claims made are simply NOT correct. They are further made by at least one Lawyer that is wrong on the facts and wrong on the Court, wrong purposefully so for POLITICAL reasons.
     
  4. Larkinn
    Offline

    Larkinn Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2007
    Messages:
    5,598
    Thanks Received:
    174
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +175
    I have neither stated not implied "just that". I was asking for the cite so I can look it up and see whether you are, yet again, lying without having to do more research than necessary.

    Who exactly on this board has said that, and please quote them.

    The base charge was that a recount was unconstituional. The court ruled 5-4 along party lines on that.

    By the way...I don't suppose you ever took back your claim that the ruling was 6-3 did you?

    Considering you don't know what the court has done, I really don't trust you to decide whether other peoples claims on the courts actions are legitimate or not.
     
  5. RetiredGySgt
    Online

    RetiredGySgt Platinum Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    39,556
    Thanks Received:
    5,900
    Trophy Points:
    1,140
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Ratings:
    +8,972
    Wrong again , for being our intellectual superior it simply boogles the mind how you can not get simple facts right.

    The base charge was that the Specific recount as ordered by the Florida Supreme Court was wrong. That was affirmed 7-2. The 5-4 decision was whether there was enough time left to fix the count across the State.

    But do continue to pretend otherwise.

    As for the rest YOU specifically posted in a thread I was in that the Democrats had not done as I posted. That you are now feigning ignorance on the issue is hillarious, but par for the course from the guy that thinks the statement " it depends on what IS means" is the height of intellicutual defense.

    Twist twist twist, it won't do you any good, but do keep trying, at least you are in here trying, as opposed to several other posters that want nothing more than to distance themselves from their foolish claims.
     
  6. Larkinn
    Offline

    Larkinn Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2007
    Messages:
    5,598
    Thanks Received:
    174
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +175
    *sigh*...what was the main issue at hand in the court case? It was whether there would be a recount or not, yes? That was the base issue. The 5-4 decision came much closer to that than the 7-2 decision.

    Yay more lies from RGS. You claimed a bunch of things that "liberals" wanted as a generic generalization. You were wrong. Me calling you wrong does not mean every single statement in your paragraph was wrong. Really, is this complicated?

    I can see how trying to explain simple concepts to someone as stupid as you seems like twisting, but its really not. I also note how you are refusing to give the cite. I also wonder, which of these court cases have you actually read? Any? Or are you just relying on the commentary of others?
     
  7. maineman
    Offline

    maineman BANNED

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2006
    Messages:
    13,003
    Thanks Received:
    572
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    guess
    Ratings:
    +572
    RGS: Are you suggesting that the Supreme Court did NOT vote 5-4 to put a halt to the Florida recount?
     
  8. Larkinn
    Offline

    Larkinn Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2007
    Messages:
    5,598
    Thanks Received:
    174
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +175
    Thats a vague question...they voted 7-2 to halt the recount as it was currently being done. Its not that the recount, generally, was a problem but that the way it was being done was. However as to whether to order a new recount in line with USSC directives, that was ruled against 5-4.
     
  9. maineman
    Offline

    maineman BANNED

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2006
    Messages:
    13,003
    Thanks Received:
    572
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    guess
    Ratings:
    +572
    the point is: for RGS to call folks LIARS for saying that the vote was 5-4 is silly.
     
  10. Larkinn
    Offline

    Larkinn Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2007
    Messages:
    5,598
    Thanks Received:
    174
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +175
    More like stupid and dishonest, but what else is new. He has made several false claims lately, all the while bleating about how liberals are liars and trying unsuccessfully to point those lies out.
     

Share This Page