The Next Presidential Term will see 3 Justices turn 80...

[candycorn]

It is very likely that the next four years will see a President be able to appoint multiple justices to the high court.

If you value a woman's right to make her own reproductive choices, a court that will favor ordinary Americans and not big businesses as the Roberts court did in Citizens United, that will uphold rights to privacy and limits on Big Brother...you should consider voting for President Obama.

Governor Romney wants to overturn the Roe decision and will likely be able to accomplish that since two of the three justices, Ginsburg and Kennedy, are currently thought to be votes to preserve a woman's right to choose.

Just some food for thought.

 

[GuyPinestra]

Vote for Obama! Preserve your right to murder innocent babies! It's the American Way!!

 

[Zander]

Yet another reason to give Obama the amateur his walking papers....

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Obama is the worst choice one could make if they want reasonable, well thought out Judges on the High Court. Just look who he already put there.

 

[tjvh]

It is very likely that the next four years will see a President be able to appoint multiple justices to the high court.

If you value a woman's right to make her own reproductive choices, a court that will favor ordinary Americans and not big businesses as the Roberts court did in Citizens United, that will uphold rights to privacy and limits on Big Brother...you should consider voting for President Obama.

Governor Romney wants to overturn the Roe decision and will likely be able to accomplish that since two of the three justices, Ginsburg and Kennedy, are currently thought to be votes to preserve a woman's right to choose.

Just some food for thought.

So how does this work? You start a thread and it fails, so you wait a few more days and start the exact same thread expecting a different result?

 

[candycorn]

It is very likely that the next four years will see a President be able to appoint multiple justices to the high court.

If you value a woman's right to make her own reproductive choices, a court that will favor ordinary Americans and not big businesses as the Roberts court did in Citizens United, that will uphold rights to privacy and limits on Big Brother...you should consider voting for President Obama.

Governor Romney wants to overturn the Roe decision and will likely be able to accomplish that since two of the three justices, Ginsburg and Kennedy, are currently thought to be votes to preserve a woman's right to choose.

Just some food for thought.

So how does this work? You start a thread and it fails, so you wait a few more days and start the exact same thread expecting a different result?

Fails? It had 500 replies...

The next 4 years will see a President get to appoint likely multiple justices. These justices will be on the court for decades deciding everything from Roe to your right to expect privacy, to who can buy your politicians....to hopefully getting rid of the War Powers Act.

There are numerous reasons to vote for or against either major party candidate. I tend to support a woman's choice to maintain her reproductive rights, I heard yesterday that the Koch Brothers (and likely others) will spend more than McCain did in '08, and am in worry over privacy since I work in a field where it is a priority. So I support President Obama.

If you feel that women have too many rights with their body, that campaign financing is just peachy, and don't value your privacy, Governor Romney is your guy I suppose.

 

[TruthSeeker56]

I never have been able to figure out the connection between "privacy" and "infanticide".

Only a liberal can justify, promote, and gleefully boast about this "connection".

 

[LordBrownTrout]

With Roberts being the new swing vote, I doubt you have to worry too much about Roe being overturned.

 

[Artevelde]

How about those people who believe that the US Supreme Court should uphold the Constitution as it is written, and not as certain activists want it to read? How should the OP influence their presidential choice?

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Didn't we see this thread from you already?

Boring.........

 

[Rat in the Hat]

Didn't we see this thread from you already?

Boring.........

He believes in the old saying... "If at first you don't succeed, keep on sucking until you do succeed".

 

[sarahgop]

Obama is the worst choice one could make if they want reasonable, well thought out Judges on the High Court. Just look who he already put there.

like roberts?

 

[Barb]

Didn't we see this thread from you already?

Boring.........

He believes in the old saying... "If at first you don't succeed, keep on sucking until you do succeed".

It isn't as if those stakes aren't known, still, its interesting what you all choose to ignore as inconsequential. I think this thread needs to be bumped all day, and thanks for doing your part.

 

[Rat in the Hat]

Didn't we see this thread from you already?

Boring.........

He believes in the old saying... "If at first you don't succeed, keep on sucking until you do succeed".

It isn't as if those stakes aren't known, still, its interesting what you all choose to ignore as inconsequential. I think this thread needs to be bumped all day, and thanks for doing your part.

Then he should bump his old thread, instead of starting a new one.

 

[Barb]

He believes in the old saying... "If at first you don't succeed, keep on sucking until you do succeed".

It isn't as if those stakes aren't known, still, its interesting what you all choose to ignore as inconsequential. I think this thread needs to be bumped all day, and thanks for doing your part.

Then he should bump his old thread, instead of starting a new one.

Maybe, but starting a new on got you all to bump it for him.

 

[Truthmatters]

its part of the permanent majority plan of roves.

Its why they cheated to put Bush in office

 

[DontBeStupid]

I never have been able to figure out the connection between "privacy" and "infanticide".

Only a liberal can justify, promote, and gleefully boast about this "connection".

And I've never been able to figure out how 4 cells = 1 baby.

Only a "conservative" gleefully proclaims rights for cells over the rights of women.

 

[Sarah G]

We need to get the House back and reelect Obama then we can get some good Supremes in there.

Daunting but doable.

 

[candycorn]

With Roberts being the new swing vote, I doubt you have to worry too much about Roe being overturned.

You may be right about Roe....thank goodness.

 

[candycorn]

How about those people who believe that the US Supreme Court should uphold the Constitution as it is written, and not as certain activists want it to read? How should the OP influence their presidential choice?

Well, the supreme court sort of specializes in interpreting the document. If it was just a binary argument, lower courts rulings would suffice.

The right to privacy isn't guaranteed by the Constitution. So are we to assume that nobody has a right to expect private matters to remain so?

I'm all for further perfecting the Constitution in a whole plethora of different arenas but we all know that, for some reason, we must live under a 225 year old document that was written prior to the invention of steam engines, street lamps, electricity, and likely gravity. If you were watching the US from another planet, you'd be amused to say the very least.