DirtyGreek All American 29309 Posts user info edit post |
and democracy a little more, maybe. alito's a strong supporter of hte president's right ot... basically... do whatever he wants "in a time of war," as is the republican congress
so we basically have a dictator now who won't act like one, hopefully, but he basically has that power. full control of the federal government by one man.
I hear that prague is nice this time of year. 1/31/2006 11:37:05 AM |
GoldenViper All American 16056 Posts user info edit post |
That all sounds rather dire. 1/31/2006 11:38:52 AM |
PinkandBlack Suspended 10517 Posts user info edit post |
BUT HE GONNA STOP THEM KILLN ALL THOSE LITTLE BABIES 1/31/2006 11:45:27 AM |
DirtyGreek All American 29309 Posts user info edit post |
I don't even care about abortion if we can keep our democracy. I'd be willing to sacrifice that for separation of powers
then again, i'm not a woman, see, so I DON'T HAVE THE RIGHT TO TELL THEM WHAT THEY CAN DO WITH THEIR BODIES 1/31/2006 11:47:13 AM |
GoldenViper All American 16056 Posts user info edit post |
One d00d on t3h court ain't gonna end separation of powers. 1/31/2006 11:52:10 AM |
DirtyGreek All American 29309 Posts user info edit post |
no, but if he sways the vote he will. And it's not like i'm saying there will be a law passed that says "the president doesn't have to be checked by the other 2 powers," and the supreme court will say "yep, that's true." I'm saying individual laws that show abuse of powers by one singular power have ALOT more chance of standing now. With the president, the majority of congress, and the supreme court all basically on the same page, I'd say we're in trouble.
[Edited on January 31, 2006 at 11:54 AM. Reason : .] 1/31/2006 11:53:13 AM |
Wolfpack2K All American 7059 Posts user info edit post |
Justices in Favor of Roe v Wade: Ginsburg, Stevens, Souter, Breyer, Kennedy
That is 5. As you know, there are only 9 Justices on the Supreme Court - that looks like a majority to me. Where do you think Roe v. Wade is going within 6 months? 1/31/2006 11:57:28 AM |
JonHGuth Suspended 39171 Posts user info edit post |
i dont know, republicans havent had good luck with their appointed judges so far 1/31/2006 11:57:40 AM |
GoldenViper All American 16056 Posts user info edit post |
^^ DG is just preaching the end of the world.
Somebody's got to do it. 1/31/2006 12:00:13 PM |
DirtyGreek All American 29309 Posts user info edit post |
if all 5 of them hold on, you're right.
but even then, that's not what I'm most worried about. 1/31/2006 12:12:53 PM |
SandSanta All American 22435 Posts user info edit post |
Democracy won't go anywhere but after this terrible presidency, the public's confidence in government will be way worse then it ever was...and it was pretty shit to begin with.
Honestly though, I think the American people deserve it.
Any democratic nation thats willing to give up freedom for "security" that really limits freedom rather then actually securing the country really doesn't deserve to be democratic. 1/31/2006 12:16:58 PM |
Wolfpack2K All American 7059 Posts user info edit post |
What do you mean it's not what you're worried about? You posted "I give roe v. wade 6 months." Now you admit that Roe v. Wade is not going anywhere within 6 months. So why did you lie? Why did you post a dishonest thread title? 1/31/2006 12:17:03 PM |
GoldenViper All American 16056 Posts user info edit post |
Why, why, why? Why is the sky blue? 1/31/2006 12:22:18 PM |
abonorio All American 9344 Posts user info edit post |
I really don't understand this whole "check on the president's power." Would you rather weild war-making powers to an unelected aristocracy immune from political fallout? Would you rather the 9 wage war as opposed to an elected president that has to answer questions?
First, democrats scream and yell and scream and yell about wiretapping but then they want to give war-making/checking powers to an unelected body... I don't quite understand that. The SC justices don't sit in on intel hearings, they don't sit in on cabinet meetings, they don't get memos about the workings of the defense department.
Prague may be nice, DirtyGreek, but hopefully you'll be able to get out before the next ethnic cleansing that befalls Europe every 50 - 100 years. 1/31/2006 12:45:23 PM |
Gamecat All American 17913 Posts user info edit post |
Quote : | "I really don't understand this whole "check on the president's power."" |
I'd say that's pretty obvious from the rest of your post. You must've missed that lesson in civics.1/31/2006 12:47:47 PM |
GrumpyGOP yovo yovo bonsoir 18156 Posts user info edit post |
Quote : | "I DON'T HAVE THE RIGHT TO TELL THEM WHAT THEY CAN DO WITH THEIR BODIES" |
YOU'VE HIT THE NAIL ON THE HEAD
THIS IS PRECISELY WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO DO
JUST BECAUSE1/31/2006 12:48:15 PM |
Wolfpack2K All American 7059 Posts user info edit post |
Quote : | "Why, why, why? Why is the sky blue?" |
Water vapor.
That is actually a good answer to my question as to why liberals lie -- their brains are full of water vapor.1/31/2006 12:49:54 PM |
DirtyGreek All American 29309 Posts user info edit post |
it's actually because of gasses in general, the most prominent of which is nitrogen
Quote : | "Honestly though, I think the American people deserve it. " |
sadly agreed.
and wolfpack, I didn't "lie." when I said I wasn't as worried about abortion, i was referring to this comment i'd made earlier:
Quote : | "I don't even care about abortion if we can keep our democracy. I'd be willing to sacrifice that for separation of powers" |
[Edited on January 31, 2006 at 12:59 PM. Reason : .]1/31/2006 12:59:20 PM |
Wolfpack2K All American 7059 Posts user info edit post |
But then why did you title your thread roe v. wade six months? With no basis for such a prediction?
Even so - would you really give up abortion for "separation of powers"? Maybe we can work out a point of agreement - I am in favor of separation of powers myself. 1/31/2006 1:02:32 PM |
super ben All American 508 Posts user info edit post |
Quote : | "The blue color of the sky is due to Rayleigh scattering. As light moves through the atmosphere, most of the longer wavelengths pass straight through. Little of the red, orange and yellow light is affected by the air.
However, much of the shorter wavelength light is absorbed by the gas molecules. The absorbed blue light is then radiated in different directions. It gets scattered all around the sky. Whichever direction you look, some of this scattered blue light reaches you. Since you see the blue light from everywhere overhead, the sky looks blue. " |
But more importantly, what makes every liberal say that Alito is in favor of letting Bush do whatever he wants? I mean, aside from from the left yelling it over and over again. Do you have any evidence whatsoever? Yes, he said that some governmental agencies fall under the executive branch, but this isn't new. And he basically preached on stare decisis for a good portion of his hearings. Just because he is conservative doesn't mean that he in favor of overturning a prior ruling (Roe v. Wade, or any other). Even if Wolfpack2k is going to suck his dick because he's a catholic, he's still a judge, and I believe (and hope) that he rules on the basis of the law and not his opinions.1/31/2006 1:08:16 PM |
GoldenViper All American 16056 Posts user info edit post |
Quote : | "Rayleigh scattering" |
Not to be confused with Raleigh scattering...1/31/2006 1:18:05 PM |
Gamecat All American 17913 Posts user info edit post |
I'm about 80% convinced that the powers-that-be on the Right are fully aware that they benefit a SHIT TON more politically with Roe v. Wade staying as is.
It's not going anywhere, DirtyGreek. Not unless you live in Georgia, Indiana, Ohio, or South Dakota. 1/31/2006 1:58:35 PM |
Wolfpack2K All American 7059 Posts user info edit post |
Actually there is a fairly sustainable argument that a Constitutional ruling could be set up in such a way that bans abortion in the entire country (by applying equal protection of the laws to unborn children as a suspect or quasi-suspect class), or at least to allow a federal statute banning abortion. 1/31/2006 2:06:42 PM |
Gamecat All American 17913 Posts user info edit post |
If that's true, then I'd imagine there's a fairly sustainable argument that a Constitutional ruling could be set up in such a way that enrolls just-fertilized eggs into Social Security in the entire country (by applying equal protection of the laws to unborn children as a suspect or quasi-suspect class), or at least to allow a federal statute recognizing fetuses as citizens. 1/31/2006 2:09:02 PM |
Wolfpack2K All American 7059 Posts user info edit post |
Fairly. You have to realize the great power of a Constitutional ruling, and the great power of the Necessary and Proper clause here.
[Edited on January 31, 2006 at 2:13 PM. Reason : add] 1/31/2006 2:12:53 PM |
Mr. Joshua Swimfanfan 43948 Posts user info edit post |
Quote : | "Prague may be nice, DirtyGreek, but hopefully you'll be able to get out before the next ethnic cleansing that befalls Europe every 50 - 100 years." |
Doesn't matter. I give it 6 months before Bush and Alito (whom I shall henceforth refer to as Bushalito) send all political opposition to labor camps! [/apocalyptic liberal]1/31/2006 2:19:09 PM |
Woodfoot All American 60354 Posts user info edit post |
my birthday is on a saturday this year
if they fuck that up by making us all nine months older i might have to kill someone 1/31/2006 2:20:57 PM |
DirtyGreek All American 29309 Posts user info edit post |
Quote : | "Maybe we can work out a point of agreement - I am in favor of separation of powers myself." |
too bad your boy alito isn't1/31/2006 2:46:35 PM |
nastoute All American 31058 Posts user info edit post |
the american public will not stand by while abortion is outlawed
the republican party will not push too hard on this
it is a sleeping giant, and they know it 1/31/2006 2:59:15 PM |
Excoriator Suspended 10214 Posts user info edit post |
I'm so tired of hearing all this hysteria about how the separation of powers is jeapardy due to one-party control of the legislature and presidency. And now this added rhetoric regarding the judiciary
the branches of government still exist! Just because they agree with each other, or even just agree to go along with the president does not mean that there is no more separation of powers. They have simply decided to work their power in unison.
AT ANY TIME ANY BRANCH CAN STILL BREAK FROM THE STATUS QUO
until there comes a day when a branch of government is made subservient by another branch (as opposed to voluntarily cooperating with the other branch), don't talk about separation of powers or dictatorships.
Our government is still operating just as it was designed.
There's no constitutional requirement that the three branches be at odds with each other. Just because you are personally at odds with the majority, doesn't mean there is a Presidential dictatorship. If you've got a problem with it, WIN A FREAKING ELECTION
[Edited on January 31, 2006 at 3:11 PM. Reason : s] 1/31/2006 3:10:10 PM |
Gamecat All American 17913 Posts user info edit post |
^^ That's exactly my point. They realize that seeing Roe v. Wade overturned would be disastrous politically for the GOP.
[Edited on January 31, 2006 at 3:26 PM. Reason : ^^] 1/31/2006 3:11:40 PM |
DirtyGreek All American 29309 Posts user info edit post |
Quote : | "I'm so tired of hearing all this hysteria about how the separation of powers is jeapardy due to one-party control of the legislature and presidency. And now this added rhetoric regarding the judiciary" |
this, to be clear, is not what i'm saying. It is dangerous that they control all 3 houses, but that's not what I'm worried about. I'm worried about most of them thinking it's a-ok for the president to get extra powers during wartime such as warrantless searches and locking people up without a trial1/31/2006 3:24:39 PM |
Excoriator Suspended 10214 Posts user info edit post |
If they think it is ok, THEN IT IS OK
once you guys win some elections, then you'll start making use of those checks and balances and you'll make it "not ok"
but for now, YES, it is ok because the other two branches of government have given him their blessing.
quit whining. win public support.
[Edited on January 31, 2006 at 3:27 PM. Reason : s] 1/31/2006 3:26:09 PM |
Gamecat All American 17913 Posts user info edit post |
Yeah. It looks like Excoriator's arguing with bigfoot there.
I don't see anyone confusing the issue of having three branches of government agree politically with anything relating to separation of powers. Well, no one except this guy:
1/31/2006 3:28:40 PM |
HockeyRoman All American 11811 Posts user info edit post |
[Edited on January 31, 2006 at 3:33 PM. Reason : Oops.]
1/31/2006 3:30:52 PM |
HockeyRoman All American 11811 Posts user info edit post |
[Edited on January 31, 2006 at 3:33 PM. Reason : Ooops x2.]
1/31/2006 3:31:30 PM |
HockeyRoman All American 11811 Posts user info edit post |
Quote : | " "Why, why, why? Why is the sky blue?"
Wolfpack2K: Water vapor." |
Good God you are stupid. Please stick to being a pundit for the right. kkthx.1/31/2006 3:32:31 PM |
Excoriator Suspended 10214 Posts user info edit post |
Quote : | "alito's a strong supporter of hte president's right ot... basically... do whatever he wants "in a time of war," as is the republican congress
so we basically have a dictator now who won't act like one, hopefully, but he basically has that power. full control of the federal government by one man." |
we don't have a dictator. we have a properly functioning government whose branches have agreed to allow a greater extent of the president's power.
Once one branch changes its mind, the president's power will be checked and balanced.
Are you guys claiming that your own argument is a straw-man? because this is how DG opened the thread.1/31/2006 3:39:36 PM |
Gamecat All American 17913 Posts user info edit post |
Actually, no. What you're talking about in no way relates to what's meant by the system of "checks and balances."
The Congress is Republican. So what?
Judgeships are sliding right? Big deal.
The President wholesale ignored a law passed by Congress requiring him to obtain warrants from the judiciary in order to wiretap domestic phone calls? Total absence of check or balance.
There has been no blessing on this. Otherwise Specter wouldn't be holding hearings on the matter.
[Edited on January 31, 2006 at 3:51 PM. Reason : ...] 1/31/2006 3:46:59 PM |
trikk311 All American 2793 Posts user info edit post |
Quote : | "I hear that prague is nice this time of year." |
indeed...i will buy your plane ticket1/31/2006 3:49:09 PM |
Excoriator Suspended 10214 Posts user info edit post |
So first you claim in bold, "TOTAL ABSENCE OF CHECK AND BALANCE" but then in the same breath you reference Specter's hearings on the matter as an example of how the president's actions violated the system of checks and balances.
seems to me, the system is still functioning.
wtf are you crying about 1/31/2006 3:55:09 PM |
Woodfoot All American 60354 Posts user info edit post |
wait
if you're just buying plane tickets to europe
i got some vacation time
holla 1/31/2006 3:55:10 PM |
Gamecat All American 17913 Posts user info edit post |
Quote : | "So first you claim in bold, "TOTAL ABSENCE OF CHECK AND BALANCE" but then in the same breath you reference Specter's hearings on the matter as an example of how the president's actions violated the system of checks and balances.
seems to me, the system is still functioning." |
Due, of course, to the altruism of our leadership and not a series of leaks in the press (not an official branch of government) that some are suggesting were themselves acts of treason, right? Specter's hearings on the matter aren't happening until at least 5 years after the activity began and would not have happened at all if the NY Times hadn't broke the story.
[Edited on January 31, 2006 at 4:02 PM. Reason : ...]1/31/2006 4:01:53 PM |
Protostar All American 3495 Posts user info edit post |
Why does it matter so much? I would be okay with Roe?Wade standing so long as no government funds on ANY level were used to pay for abortions. If women want their right to choose, let them pay for it. Let the hatemongering commence. 1/31/2006 4:02:53 PM |
Gamecat All American 17913 Posts user info edit post |
I'm not far from agreeing with that. 1/31/2006 4:06:58 PM |
Excoriator Suspended 10214 Posts user info edit post |
Quote : | "Due, of course, to the altruism of our leadership and not a series of leaks in the press (not an official branch of government) that some are suggesting were themselves acts of treason, right? Specter's hearings on the matter aren't happening until at least 5 years after the activity began and would not have happened at all if the NY Times hadn't broke the story." |
Bush has been briefing the congress about this since it started. The checks and balances are working perfectly. What we're seeing now is public pressure starting to exert its own influence in the system.
Please don't be that guy who claims that Bush's briefings were meaningless because congress' hands were tied. Thats total BS. They could have gone into closed session at ANY TIME. But they didn't - why? because they agreed with the president. ergo, the system works, has worked, and will continue to work.1/31/2006 4:06:58 PM |
Gamecat All American 17913 Posts user info edit post |
The point -> .
You -------------------------------------------------------------> .
How did the President's briefings of Congress change the fact that he was bypassing the judiciary, as was federally mandated? 1/31/2006 4:09:01 PM |
Excoriator Suspended 10214 Posts user info edit post |
He claims that he was allowed to. Going forward, this argument will be hammered out in court or in congress..... I wonder why? oh gee, maybe because separation of powers is still working. 1/31/2006 4:13:08 PM |
Gamecat All American 17913 Posts user info edit post |
Quote : | "Excoriator: He claims that he was allowed to." |
Assertion != Fact
Quote : | "Excoriator: Going forward, this argument will be hammered out in court or in congress..... I wonder why? oh gee, maybe because separation of powers is still working." |
No thanks to the executive branch.1/31/2006 4:16:25 PM |
Excoriator Suspended 10214 Posts user info edit post |
Quote : | "Assertion != Fact" |
no duh, but if the separation of powers was as broken as you guys are claiming it to be, ("Total absence of check or balance."), then his mere assertion would never be challenged.
It is being challenged. Separation of powers is alive and well. You don't have an argument. Stop whining and win some elections.1/31/2006 4:26:39 PM |