SCOTUS is enough reason for me to vote for Obama

[Lakhota]

Earl Ofari Hutchinson: Romney Poses Greatest Danger to the Supreme Court

Jamin Raskin: The Frightening Prospect of a Romney Court

Importance of the Supreme Court in the Upcoming Election | blog.pfaw.org

The Importance of the Supreme Court in the 2012 Presidential Election | People For the American Way

 

[mamooth]

What, you don't want to be legally owned by a corporation? What's wrong with you? We need more conservative justices to tell us that the Constitution really does say "Corporations are people" and "money is free speech".

 

[Charles_Main]

Earl Ofari Hutchinson: Romney Poses Greatest Danger to the Supreme Court

Jamin Raskin: The Frightening Prospect of a Romney Court

Importance of the Supreme Court in the Upcoming Election | blog.pfaw.org

The Importance of the Supreme Court in the 2012 Presidential Election | People For the American Way

I have to agree the SCOTUS is a Powerful reason to want your man in there. Which is why I definitely do not want to see another 4 years of Obama.

 

[Charles_Main]

What, you don't want to be legally owned by a corporation? What's wrong with you? We need more conservative justices to tell us that the Constitution really does say "Corporations are people" and "money is free speech".

Advertising is free speech, and guess what. It costs money and lots of it. If people want to be heard on a national level, they have to contribute to large packs who can then buy the Expensive Air time.

I know you guys liked it when only your side had that kind of organization and pooling of money with the Unions, but those days are dead.

lol

 

[Votto]

Earl Ofari Hutchinson: Romney Poses Greatest Danger to the Supreme Court

Jamin Raskin: The Frightening Prospect of a Romney Court

Importance of the Supreme Court in the Upcoming Election | blog.pfaw.org

The Importance of the Supreme Court in the 2012 Presidential Election | People For the American Way

I smell shill in the air. I hate the smell of shill in the morning.

First of all, Obamacare forces you to buy corporate insurance. In short, Judge Roberts turned it into a tax just to make it half way Constitutional, which essentially lets corporate America set out tax rates. I have no second of all, that is far worse than what Romney could do to us.

Welcome to corporate hell. Now back to work slave so you can buy corporate insurance.

 

[dblack]

Earl Ofari Hutchinson: Romney Poses Greatest Danger to the Supreme Court

Jamin Raskin: The Frightening Prospect of a Romney Court

Importance of the Supreme Court in the Upcoming Election | blog.pfaw.org

The Importance of the Supreme Court in the 2012 Presidential Election | People For the American Way

I smell shill in the air. I hate the smell of shill in the morning.

First of all, Obamacare forces you to buy corporate insurance. In short, Judge Roberts turned it into a tax just to make it half way Constitutional, which essentially lets corporate America set out tax rates.

Welcome to hell.

Tell me about it. It's stunning to me that people who give so much phony lip service railing about corporate excess, defend a law that is the most egregious corporate giveaway in US history - essentially granting insurance companies the power of taxation. It's pretty stunning to think of historically. I suppose next the corporate/government beast will be looking to take control of the food supply.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Well, let's take Mitt Romney at his word. The Justices he cites as his favorites are also the most extreme: Scalia, Thomas, Alito. He reached back into the 1980s to choose as his constitutional advisor Robert Bork, the right-wing polemicist and former Reagan Supreme Court nominee so extreme that he was rejected by a bipartisan coalition of Senators in 1987. Amazingly, Romney said that he wished Bork were "already on the Court."

The specter of the likes of Bork ‘advising’ a president Romney is more than enough to compel any advocate of the rule of law to vote for Obama.

 

[Charles_Main]

Well, let's take Mitt Romney at his word. The Justices he cites as his favorites are also the most extreme: Scalia, Thomas, Alito. He reached back into the 1980s to choose as his constitutional advisor Robert Bork, the right-wing polemicist and former Reagan Supreme Court nominee so extreme that he was rejected by a bipartisan coalition of Senators in 1987. Amazingly, Romney said that he wished Bork were "already on the Court."

The specter of the likes of Bork ‘advising’ a president Romney is more than enough to compel any advocate of the rule of law to vote for Obama.

Obama and the Rule of Law? Well maybe if he agrees with the Law. Obama is the most Lawless President ever. Your logic Makes no sense at all. Obama has no respect for the Constitutional Separation of Powers. None.

 

[Lakhota]

Some of my other reasons for voting Obama:

Bill Clinton Cites Economist Kenneth Rogoff To Argue Obama Needs Four More Years

 

[Votto]

Earl Ofari Hutchinson: Romney Poses Greatest Danger to the Supreme Court

Jamin Raskin: The Frightening Prospect of a Romney Court

Importance of the Supreme Court in the Upcoming Election | blog.pfaw.org

The Importance of the Supreme Court in the 2012 Presidential Election | People For the American Way

I smell shill in the air. I hate the smell of shill in the morning.

First of all, Obamacare forces you to buy corporate insurance. In short, Judge Roberts turned it into a tax just to make it half way Constitutional, which essentially lets corporate America set out tax rates.

Welcome to hell.

Tell me about it. It's stunning to me that people who give so much phony lip service railing about corporate excess, defend a law that is the most egregious corporate giveaway in US history - essentially granting insurance companies the power of taxation. It's pretty stunning to think of historically. I suppose next the corporate/government beast will be looking to take control of the food supply.

Just so long as it is not the GOP at the wheel, that is all that matters cause the democrats are for the work'in man!!

Why do I feel like I'm on an episode of the Beverly Hillbillies?

 

[candycorn]

Earl Ofari Hutchinson: Romney Poses Greatest Danger to the Supreme Court

Jamin Raskin: The Frightening Prospect of a Romney Court

Importance of the Supreme Court in the Upcoming Election | blog.pfaw.org

The Importance of the Supreme Court in the 2012 Presidential Election | People For the American Way

Been my case all along.

Both parties are out to lunch fiscally and Presidents can only do so much about that in either direction.

What a President can directly effect is the make-up of federal courts. Center-left jurists are best in my view.

 

[Votto]

Earl Ofari Hutchinson: Romney Poses Greatest Danger to the Supreme Court

Jamin Raskin: The Frightening Prospect of a Romney Court

Importance of the Supreme Court in the Upcoming Election | blog.pfaw.org

The Importance of the Supreme Court in the 2012 Presidential Election | People For the American Way

Been my case all along.

Both parties are out to lunch fiscally and Presidents can only do so much about that in either direction.

What a President can directly effect is the make-up of federal courts. Center-left jurists are best in my view.

What confuses the hell out of me are those on the left who whine and moan about corporate America being in charge of political life in Washington and abroad. Then in the same breath they seek to empower such a government further. Duh!!

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Boy, you guys are going to be fucked should Ginsburg not retire. Because unless the GOP completely implodes over the next four years, if Obama gets a second term there will most definitely be no 5th GW Bush term from the Democrats.

Which means the potential for an even more staunch "conservative" president to appoint to the court after 2016 is likely.

So this "bet" you're placing has some high stakes. Ones I find perplexing considering you guys want to make sure a big govt. proponent court appointment happens...but Romney is basically a LOLberal parading around as a conservative. He'd appoint LOLberal justices too.

 

[Votto]

Boy, you guys are going to be fucked should Ginsburg not retire. Because unless the GOP completely implodes over the next four years, if Obama gets a second term there will most definitely be no 5th GW Bush term from the Democrats.

Which means the potential for an even more staunch "conservative" president to appoint to the court after 2016 is likely.

So this "bet" you're placing has some high stakes. Ones I find perplexing considering you guys want to make sure a big govt. proponent court appointment happens...but Romney is basically a LOLberal parading around as a conservative. He'd appoint LOLberal justices too.

Just like "W" appointed judge Roberts.

It is odd that Republicans will appoint liberals but democrats NEVER appoint conservative judges.

 

[Lakhota]

 

[Stephanie]

which website told lakhota this?



oh nevermind I see it the hufferpost

 

[tjvh]

Boy, you guys are going to be fucked should Ginsburg not retire. Because unless the GOP completely implodes over the next four years, if Obama gets a second term there will most definitely be no 5th GW Bush term from the Democrats.

Which means the potential for an even more staunch "conservative" president to appoint to the court after 2016 is likely.

So this "bet" you're placing has some high stakes. Ones I find perplexing considering you guys want to make sure a big govt. proponent court appointment happens...but Romney is basically a LOLberal parading around as a conservative. He'd appoint LOLberal justices too.

Just like "W" appointed judge Roberts.

It is odd that Republicans will appoint liberals but democrats NEVER appoint conservative judges.

Yeah, they like to please both sides of the fence. The Conservatives haven't figured out that the liberals on the other side of the fence will continue to throw rocks at them regardless of what they do, so the reality is that they need to dismiss liberals exactly like liberals dismiss them and screw bipartisanship when Conservatives have the power.

 

[Charles_Main]

Boy, you guys are going to be fucked should Ginsburg not retire. Because unless the GOP completely implodes over the next four years, if Obama gets a second term there will most definitely be no 5th GW Bush term from the Democrats.

Which means the potential for an even more staunch "conservative" president to appoint to the court after 2016 is likely.

So this "bet" you're placing has some high stakes. Ones I find perplexing considering you guys want to make sure a big govt. proponent court appointment happens...but Romney is basically a LOLberal parading around as a conservative. He'd appoint LOLberal justices too.

Just like "W" appointed judge Roberts.

It is odd that Republicans will appoint liberals but democrats NEVER appoint conservative judges.

yep, and Reagan Appointed Sandra.

Historically, Despite the Left Fear tactics, Republicans appoint Justices who are more concerned with the law than their own Political Feelings, while Democrats appoint clearly biased Liberal Activists.

 

[emilynghiem]

What, you don't want to be legally owned by a corporation? What's wrong with you? We need more conservative justices to tell us that the Constitution really does say "Corporations are people" and "money is free speech".

You are already screwing yourself when you let ANY judges tell you what the Constitution says. The problem with govt is there is not enough check on judges and lawyers, so the system is skewed and screwed.

People are going to have to take back responsibility for checking what is Constitutional or not, ESPECIALLY with judges and courts.

That same check can then be enforced for Corporations.
We need to hold all people, parties, corporations and govt equally to the same standards,
or we have a bunch of political bullies fighting to be in charge of deciding that for us!

Say no to ALL of that.
Stand up for consent of the governed, and the right to petition until ALL grievances are redressed, so NOBODY makes laws or rulings that impose someone's interpretation for private interest or gain above the law of the land.

Don't give this power away to judges and lawyers especially.
Take the power back and quit depending on govt.
We need to be giving the marching orders TO govt to follow by the Constitution,
not taking orders handed from the top down (much less taking them up the back side).

 

[Lakhota]

R.I.P., Mitt Romney - The Daily Beast