E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSThere are still 42 days and four debates left before the presidential election and many signs point to a close outcome, but recent polling both nationally and in key battleground states like Ohio has conservatives concerned about the impact President Obama could have on the judiciary in a second term.
The New Yorker's Jeffrey Toobin joins Morning Joe to discuss President Obama's relationship with the Supreme Court, Chief Justice John Roberts and his ruling on the Affordable Care Act, and the relationships the justices have with one another.
So far Obama has appointed 159 judges to the federal bench, including his two Supreme Court selections, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan.
With Sotomayor and Kagan, Obama simply replaced two members of the liberal bloc on the court (John Paul Stevens and David Souter) with two younger liberals. But most of the Obama-appointed judges – 127 of them – are trial judges who exert less influence on the broad direction of the law than do appeals court judges or Supreme Court justices.
Recommended: Obama denounces violence in Middle East, calls for tolerance and democracy
Both on the Supreme Court – where “swing vote” Justice Anthony Kennedy and conservative Justice Antonin Scalia are age 76 – and on the courts of appeal, where there are now 14 vacancies, Obama would be able to nudge the courts in a progressive direction if he wins a second term.
Reuters, Getty Images
In the final push in the 2012 presidential election, candidates Mitt Romney and Barack Obama make their last appeals to voters.
The high court begins its 2012-13 term on Monday and has scheduled arguments on the use of race in undergraduate admissions decisions at the University of Texas and on whether multinational firms can be sued for their alleged role in human rights abuses that occur outside the United States. It’s also likely the court will take up challenges to the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act, which defines marriage as solely the union of one man and one woman.
“It would be a bad mistake for conservatives to get gloomy and defeatist. This election is very winnable,” said Ed Whelan, president of the Ethics and Public Policy Center and a former Scalia law clerk who served in the Justice Department under President George W. Bush.
But Whelan added, “There are lots of reasons why anyone concerned about America’s future should rue the prospect of President Obama’s re-election. What President Obama would do to the Supreme Court is high on the list.”
Alex Wong / Getty Images
“The potential impact of the next president on the Supreme Court is immense,” said Carrie Severino, the chief counsel and policy director at the Judicial Crisis Network, a right-of-center advocacy group. “There could easily be three nominations during the next term. … Most people expect there to be at least one vacancy.”
She said if Obama were re-elected and got three more high court nominations, “that would put him in the position of having nominated the majority of the justices on the Supreme Court. That’s an incredible influence over the way the court shapes American society.”
She said there’s now a 5-4 split on issues that have been before or are coming before the court, such as whether schools can use applicants’ and students’ race or ethnicity in admissions or in assigning students to specific public schools.
From racial preferences to gun owners’ rights to immigration to same-sex marriage, “you name it – there are so many issues where the outcome turns on one vote at the Supreme Court and the president could easily be shaping that next vote,” Severino said. And those concerns extend even to a possible Romney presidency.
Curt Levey, president of the Committee for Justice, a conservative group that tracks judicial nominations, said Chief Justice John Roberts’ decision to join the four liberal-leaning justices in upholding Obama’s Affordable Care Act “has made conservatives think somewhat differently” about judicial nominees. “There’s a lot of sober thinking among conservatives that it is not just enough to appoint somebody who we know to have the right philosophy – you have to appoint somebody who has shown, either as a judge or perhaps in some other setting, that they will stick with that philosophy even when there’s political pressure to do otherwise.”
Of course, it’s not just those on the right who are warily watching the election outcome and its impact on the judiciary. Doug Kendall, president of the Constitutional Accountability Center, a progressive think tank and advocacy group, said, “I think a Romney presidency has a far greater potential to shift the court to the right than a second Obama term would have the potential to shift it to the left.”
Kendall said the most likely high court retiree is Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, 79, appointed to the court by President Bill Clinton in 1993. “If President Romney nominates her successor, it will have a huge impact on the ideological balance of the court. If President Obama appoints Justice Ginsburg’s successor it will simply continue the current ideological balance and will not move the court to the left at all.”
As for appeals court and trial court judges, Severino contends that in his first term Obama has not put great emphasis on appointing them. “Many of us were surprised – and relieved – that he didn’t do that in his first term. It will be interesting to see whether his focus shifts” to judicial nominations if he wins a second term, Severino said.
After eight years of Democrats delaying and blocking Bush judicial nominees such as Miguel Estrada and William Pryor, Levey said Senate Republicans decided when Obama became president “they weren’t just going to roll over” on his judicial nominees. But “the bigger reason Obama has had a record low number of confirmations, at least taken as percentage of the judiciary, is that Obama hasn’t made it a priority.”
For example, there are now 14 appeals court vacancies but only 7 Obama nominees for those vacancies.
Senate Republicans have succeeded in blocking a couple of Obama’s appeals court picks: Goodwin Liu in California and Caitlin Halligan in the District of Columbia. And they have slowed the pace of confirmation for those whom Obama has nominated.
A report issued last week by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) looked at waiting times for uncontroversial appeals court nominees, defined as nominees whom the Judiciary Committee approved by voice vote or by a unanimous roll call vote, and who were ultimately confirmed by the full Senate by voice vote, or with five or fewer ‘nay’ votes.
The CRS report found that the average number of days from nomination by the president to Senate confirmation went from 64 days during Ronald Reagan’s presidency to 201 days in George W. Bush’s presidency to 227 days during Obama’s presidency.
“My expectation is that President Obama will have to take that battle on more directly in a second term,” Kendall said.
Noting that Republicans had prevented confirmation of Obama’s two nominees to the powerful U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, which hears most regulatory agency appeals, Kendall said, “He needs to fill those seats” and needs to “exercise his constitutional authority as president to fill vacancies on that incredibly important court.”
Leave a Comment:
A good first step for any new court would be to get rid of Citizens United.
COinFL,
Agreed! Lets make it real simple, only "people" with a SS# can make a campaign contribution and all contributions are public!
I couldn't have said it better myself.
Ponder away... as we have had to endure a so-called "Conservative" court that with Citizens United has put the very idea of democracy at risk!
I don't think that a court should be Liberal or Conservative... It should be made up of people willing to interpret the law without BIAS!!!!!!!! but until that happens...GO LIBERAL and DO AWAY WITH CITIZENS UNITED for starters and then get Congress to create a voters bill that will NEVER disinfranchise ANY American!!!!
I am not afraid of what the court will look like if the Progressives win but I am DEEPLY AFRAID of what will happen if the GOP wins.
The Progressives will not really shake anything up. PEOPLE will get a few more rights and that will be the end of it.
If the GOP wins, we are looking at TOTAL CORPORATE TAKEOVER. People will have NO RIGHTS against corporations. After all, they will be equal to a HUMAN BEING under the law except in practical terms they have UNLIMITED RESOURCES and ARE IMMORTAL.
If the Progressives win, we may get a CORPORATE DEATH PENALTY. If the GOP wins we get DEATH BY CORPORATION!
Time to get rid of the conservatives that gave us PACS through the Robert's Court that are allowing the buying of America. Let's put in some extreme Progressives to get us back to the middle again! I pray to God to get rid of this mess that republican Do Nothings have put us in!
Even if Obama is reelected, he'll have a tough time getting any appointees through a Senate that has less than 60 Democratic senators. The GOP will continue to play the Filibuster card...
Wow! Almost taken right out of the socialist playbook. It's all about the subtle nudges that nobody notices until it's too late. Read the book nudge and see what kind of mediocracy he has in store for all of us. At least those of us who aren't in government.
42 days and Romney is still in a Daze !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Elliot, do you even know what the word socialist means? I don't think ya do....
Regarding Citizens United, I'd be very surprised if a new Court at some point in the future did a complete about-face on the ruling. You can probably count on one hand the number of times throughout its history the Court has done that.
What I predict will happen is that Republican super-PACs will outspend Democrats by obscene amounts, but Democrats will hold onto the White House and the Senate in November. This will cause the fatcats who made these bloated super-PACs possible to reconsider flushing so much of their money down the toilet in future elections.
In that way, the American voters will substantially blunt the impact of Citizens United.
Ray, I'm sitting here at my desk looking up at my bookshelf at copy of The Communist Manifesto that I had to study in college and beginning to wonder why, "do you even know what the word socialism means?" seems to be the standard response anytime someone brings up socialism.
To answer your question, yes, I do know what the word socialism means. I also know of the many forms of socialism that have been tried over the centuries and have no problem finding similarities to what 0bama is doing.
Oh my gosh! Why hadn't I thought of this before? I was so focused on getting rid of Scalia that I completely over-looked the possibility that President Obama could appoint a MAJORITY of the justices on the Supreme Court.
Imagine a world where rational progressives get to rule on questions concerning abortion, gay rights, citizens united, the Arizona illegal immigration law, voter suppression, and Texas Gerrymandering, instead of five activist Neo-Con justices.
One can only hope.
This sheds a whole new light on the importance of this election. If President Obama accomplished NOTHING else during his second term than appointing 2-3 more justices to the Supreme Court, that would be enough.
What a difference that would make.
Obama/Biden 2012
By "communist manifesto" you mean the dictionary, right? I could pull a lot of similarities between the GW Bush Administration and the Nazis, but it hardly makes the two of them equivalent. Oh, and I could name a lot of civilizations that aren't around anymore that ran on the survival of the fittest model that Ayn Rand espouses.
You're reading in a lot into the single word, "nudge" in an online article.
agreed Elliot. Looking at the prospects for the SC it's just another reason among many that I won't be voting for O.
I'm concerned the Obama supporters will NOT bother voting convinced that he will win. The Tea Party will turn out in force and Romney will be President.
6 months ago, I wouldn't have dreamed I'd vote for Obama again. But I can't stand the thought of the religious right taking over our liberties.
VOTE! If you can vote early, do it!
elliot-3020456
"Ray, I'm sitting here at my desk looking up at my bookshelf at copy of The Communist Manifesto"
You may want to read what your parties about instead of just looking at the book! guess you didn't study it in college either because if you did you would understand that Obama is neither a Socialist or a Marxist... but you can't have that as it would deviate from the right wing rhetoric that the right are the saviors of freedom and democracy even though you want to take the freedom to vote away from millions and circumvent democracy...WOW - isn't that somewhat Marxist?
Ok, elliot, how about an example?
I mean, I can sit here and type "yeah, I understand nuclear engineering." But if I leave it at that, would you be convinced?
This is the internet, you don't have to believe me and I don't care if you do. Just understand that Socialism is not a big secret, we even have a Socialist Party in the US http://socialistparty-usa.net/
Stop deflecting and just accept that 0bama is pushing us toward socialism, because thats no secret either.
The conservatives on the court are the younger, healthy ones. The older, sickly ones are all libs, and if one of them retires or dies, we know that Obama will appoint yet another unqualified minority female....sort of a tit-for-tat, with no change to the status quo.
Relax, elliot, loudmothed libs are always telling us on this site that we don't know the real definition of socialism.....but, they never do the obvious and tell us what it is....never has happened. What does that tell you about them?
CU had zero impact on campaign contributions...
All this back and forth about what socialism or marxism is, but not a one of you will stick you neck out and state the definition of either one.
lilDi,
That is because they do not know or understand what it is or suspect the other side doesn't and are waiting for someone to slip up and blab so the flaming can continue.
The truth is that those comparing socialism to Communism are dead wrong. Socialism is in no way related to Communism. The only reason people think so is because of @!$%#s ,ike McCarthy in the 50's who took the work "Communist" and applied it to Russia. Russia was a Communist nation in the past but they had not been Communist since they coalesced into the USSR.
In a pure Communism there is no Government, there are no classes, there are no lines of sovereignty. Everyone makes the same amount of money no matter what they do, the Gardeners would make the same as the physicists. But they do not actually make this money, it is paid into a state treasury where it is them dispensed in the form of daily necessities for the citizens.
There have been very few true blue Communist nations. The USSR was more Socialist than Communist. Socialism does have some similarities to Communism however as I said they are nothing alike. Almost all nations practice some level of Socialism and always have.
Socialism is the idea that some money is paid to the state in order for the state to run services that benefit the public. Our military is a socialist concept. Medicare, public assistance, police and fire departments, regulatory agencies, and local and state Governments.
Capitalism is on the other far end of the mid-ideology scale and in someways at the far end as well. In a pure Capitalism there are no restraints placed on businesses by the Government. A business can cheat their customers out of billions of dollars and nothing will happen to them legally as a response by Government. In this model the people are trusted to stop using companies that are predatory and that scam their customers.
This model will never work in modern America unless all business play by the same rules and do not restrict growth of competitors. The class structure is set up so that those who are successful make the most money and those that are not as successful are restricted to poverty in most cases. China has a lot in common with a pure Capitalism society economically.
Then you have Fascism, Capitalism taken to its farthest extremes. In Fascism you have one party and only one party. There are also likely no elections because it is a authoritarian Governance style. In Fascism there is also a no-class structure but this is because it is a nation that is made up of one race, one nationality. You are forced to follow the national policy on everything: religion, ideology, you name it; if you do not you are likely to either be expelled from the country or more likely to wind up in a concentration camp.
There are no Governments in existence today that are pure forms of any of these, they are a mix of all four and it is that mixture that we see differences in. To call any nation a "Capitalist" or a "Communist" nation is a fallacy as all nations have a mixture of principles from these ideologies.
Pure forms of these types of Governments are also volatile and more apt to collapse because they are not good forms of Government by themselves. They require temperament by the other styles in order to become more viable.
This is why anyone wanting any kind of a pure style of Government is an idiot. They either do not understand this basic concept that all Governments have mixtures of ideologies from these four or they have something to gain from that style of Government and do not care that changing to that purer form will likely destroy their country.
Sorry libbys, but unions have had PAC's for years. So saying coporate America is trying to influence elections is not all true. Unions do their fair share of manipulating too.
I'm with those of you who've said they are much more frightened of a Romney Court - but, fortunately, it doesn't seem we'll be forced to tolerate that horror.
Yes, Unions and Corporations - I'd treat them the same way politically. Neither has a mandate to spend other people's money on political campaigns as far as I can tell.
Nicely stated Geowil. I hope every one gets a chance to read your post. I think you are right that very few here know the definition of those ideologies. Especially socialism.
elliot-3020456
Likewise, I have a copy of Hitler's Mein Kampf and have no difficulty in finding similarities to what the Tea Party nazis and the right wing republicans are doing. If I had a choice between Nazi Germany and Communist China, I'll take China hands down. Those 24-hour furnaces the Nazis operated would really give me heartburn........
Geowil Simply awesome thanks. Whats your take on a true Democracy or Republic? Since you are able to define all this in plain American English. :-)
what i want to comment on is what maddona said "vote to get obama re-elected the black muslim in the whitehouse" funny how msnbc made sure no one could comment about the dirty little secret that was let out of the bag..
and also obama stands at u.n. podium and declares his main concern is slavery around the world.. what about our economy and outside terriots threats....
What would be wrong with having some Democrats? Right now is just a Bush court!!!!!
1) From the story I seem to deduce that if Obama is elected we will have a court that will function or best serves the US public. If so "I m in." I am Voting 4 Obama!!!
2) If he is re-elected he will introduce a bill that the supreme court nominees will not serve past age 67 to avoid hallucination over the bench. I am "Voting 4 Obama."
3) If he is re-elected he will introduce a bill so the supreme court judges are publicly voted in to the bench and may have to be re-elected to the bench again by the people. I am voting 4 Obama. The us government is divided along three powers, the executive, judicial and legislative. While the Legislative and Executive hiring and firing power is given to the citizen for some apparent reason the judicial branch is not. It is time we the people hired and fired these fellows.
Amen!
So we have to deal with either a liberal court that will give rights to everyone, or a conservative court that will take away rights from people that do not conform to their ideology.
Gee... tough decision.
"elliot-3020456
This is the internet, you don't have to believe me and I don't care if you do. Just understand that Socialism is not a big secret, we even have a Socialist Party in the US
Stop deflecting and just accept that 0bama is pushing us toward socialism, because thats no secret either."
Elliot… thanks for the advice!!! So, I don't believe you and I don't care what you think..LOL, Thanks for the link to the Socialists site… here I have been a "Liberal" for all this time and never thought to go there..LOL
Thanks , but no thanks as I'm a Democrat and we have no interest in such things, we care about the country and want to live in a nation where we care for one another and where everyone has a fair chance and the nation grows and prospers for all…
Guess it was Socialism when Eisenhower built the interstates that we a nation share, or when the Internet was given to the people and we all share in its growth and success, it must be socialism when I'm willing to pay a portion of my taxes to make sure kids get an education, or have a roof over their head and food in their belly and clothes on their backs…. What you call Socialism I call being compassionate and being Human!
Elliot
Well then, I guess that settles it. President Obama is a socialist. Fortunately elliot, we are a whole lot smarter then that. You're a liar and a fool elliot. You're just another pompous ass who thinks they know more then the rest of us.
Scott
Well put.
confused3020456 wrote
And what would those similarities be???? Please back up your BS with some facts instead of making laughable stupid comments.
FYI Hitler was a left winger for socialized medicine and the like, also the left in this country is where 100 percent of the racism against minorities exists going all the way back to slavery. The GOP was started to end slavery, Lincoln was a REPUBLICAN, the Democrates started the KKK to stop blacks from joining the Rep. party, the dominate party in the south during the civil war and for slavery was the democrate party, the Rep. party tried to pass many bills for civil rights long before the 63 civil rights bill only to have the Dems stop those attempts, and on and on, and if you don't believe me just google any one of these statements.
Now please do your homework instead of just believing the first thing you hear that's why you wound up as a left wing fool.
Elliot, Obama is not a socialist, plain and simple. But since the conservative corps have fired so many people, they needed to rely upon SOCIAL programs that were set up many years prior to Obama being in office! Plain and simple! Communism is communism and that is what the Communist Manifesto is about, not socialism! Free market doesn't seem to work well without a hand to control its greed and immorality! As for a conservative SC, I don't like what they are doing to this country. Just look at their Citizens United ruling which has now led to politicians for hire by the highest bidder! That is not Democracy and you sir are a fool!
If anyone reading this thinks that Unions can command financial resources like a billion dollars like corporations do they are out of their minds.
It is a false equivalence. Unions are also strictured by strict limits and financial reporting requirements. Only donations targeted directly for political functions can be used for political purposes. The Beck ruling makes all but dues used for Union day to day operations prohibited if the member wishes.
The corporations have their Union too. It is called the United States Chamber of Commerce. Tax payer funded.
4 crying out loud, they have shown that the Supreme Court Judges have a mind of their own. They can be one thing then when they end up on TSC they totally change. Besides they have to make it through the likes of congress asking them and bugging them on a call they made 20 yrs ago. TSC will always have people wondering what they are going to do, look it the health care plan mostly everybody had them shooting it down and now we have it.
@matt
Why don't you tell everybody the rest of the story. You know, the part where all those racists hated Johnson so much they all migrated to the Republican Party and the Southern Strategy was born. As usual, you guys try to either rewrite history or flat out change it.
So try telling the WHOLE story next time. You might be a little more believable. Though I doubt it. You clowns are always underestimating us. I love low information haters and fools, they're so easy.
COinFL...
AMEN! I'm so sick of the hate ads and I live in UTAH for hellsakes! We all know how red this State is!
Pretty scary reading all these pro-Obama comments. We have a POTUS who cannot be bothered to work at getting this country back on the track from which he knocked us off. He is more concerned with hobnobbing with so-called celebrities, attending fund raisers, kowtowing to the Muslim Brotherhood and putting us deeper in debt with each passing day. Not to mention gradually gutting our military; not protecting our borders; giving billions to the terrorist Muslim Brotherhood; repeats that a stupid video, which had been seen by only 2000 viewers and unheard of by millions of others, caused the middle east uprising and murder of an Ambassador and 3 other Americans; refuses to say the word terrorist; wants to release the terrorist blind sheikh and 155 other terrorists from Gitmo; has never defended Judaism and Christians but defends Islamic terrorists. I could go on and on. We should trust this guy? I just wish all the liberals would go on the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) web site and learn something about what Obamacare will really cost us and what it's cost us so far plus where his spending will eventually lead us. And while they're at it read his Executive Orders, on line, and maybe it will scare them enough to open their eyes to what the real threat is to this country - it's sitting in the White House.
Pretty scary reading all these pro-Obama comments. We have a POTUS who cannot be bothered to work at getting this country back on the track from which he knocked us off. He is more concerned with hobnobbing with so-called celebrities, attending fund raisers, kowtowing to the Muslim Brotherhood and putting us deeper in debt with each passing day. Not to mention gradually gutting our military; not protecting our borders; giving billions to the terrorist Muslim Brotherhood; repeats that a stupid video, which had been seen by only 2000 viewers and unheard of by millions of others, caused the middle east uprising and murder of an Ambassador and 3 other Americans; refuses to say the word terrorist; wants to release the terrorist blind sheikh and 155 other terrorists from Gitmo; has never defended Judaism and Christians but defends Islamic terrorists. I could go on and on. We should trust this guy? I just wish all the liberals would go on the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) web site and learn something about what Obamacare will really cost us and what it's cost us so far plus where his spending will eventually lead us. And while they're at it read his Executive Orders, on line, and maybe it will scare them enough to open their eyes to what the real threat is to this country - it's sitting in the White House.
Old saying...Best way to end up with a socialist government is first elect a bunch of right wingers. Thats whats happening in Europe and guess what those are not socialist governments. They tend to lean to the left a little but that was because whenever you think right wing they think the next step is what Hitler put out there. Look at what so called conservatives did to the world with their corporate world! they sunk the econoy's of the entire world! Liberal? Conservative? Communist? Socialist? all just words. Reagan rode the fear of coommunism into the White hous and his people even to today make feeble references to socialism like it is a bad word which it is not. Winston Churchill said bothe democracy and socialism are bad forms of government but a marriage of the two may be the p[erfect answer. Who gives a rats behind what its called as long as it works. Americans for the most part have found that the mixture works up to a point relly well until one party goes completly to one side as have the Republicans. A sound defeat in this election just may drive out the evil that party has in it return it more to the center and prove to be the turning point for this nation with hopes for a longer better future. With this so called tparty influence which does not care what happens to this country as long as they get their spoiled brat way and can convince their followers there is some kind of imaginairy threat out there then we will wallow in the mire for somtime yet.
Message to the guy with the book on socialsm. Read it cause you probably passed college with the socialism for dummies cheat sheets cause you have no idea what you are talking about. if you go to that communist web site you posted you will find they hate Obama as much as your side does.
It does seem to be the issue that I've heard lately-There is an imaginary Obama that the right created and they are running against it.
GOPisextinct
Hmmmm, really?
Lemme see, where is that article? Oh, here it is. I'll give you the short version and then a link for your reading enjoyment.
Here’s the link to the rest of the article:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304782404577488584031850026.html#project%3DLABOR20120710%26articleTabs%3Darticle
So, persuading union members to vote a certain way, you can only imagine the brutal strong-arm tactics used here, feeding bratwursts to feed the mob that was vandalizing the Wisconsin state Capital is acceptable to you Liberals?
It would seem you Liberals/Progressives would be agreeable to stopping this type of corruption too, wouldn’t you?
It’s only “fair”, right?
So, who's out of their mind now Spanky?
Hypocrites.
ROMNEY/RYAN 2012 for real Americans
Boy Joan, you bought into every single on of those tea party chain emails didn't you. There are so many lies in your post I don't even know where to begin. So tell us Joan, are you one of those people who doesn't bother to have health insurance that we end up paying for every time you go to the emergency room for the flu? We see a lot of that. Do you have friends with prexisting conditions that couldn't get Health Insurance that now can? That's your so called Obama Care.
How about some proof that President Obama sent funds to the Muslim Brotherhood. I know, Rush told you. Well sweetie, Rush lies, a lot. One day you'll see that. To bad it's not today.
How about waiting till all the facts are known about the attack in Libya. Just because Rush and Hannity told you crap you should probably wait for the truth, instead of the lies meant only to inflame your little sensibilities.
@ Dennis Price
Really!!!! LOLOLOLOL
You're going to break out the Southern Strategy BS story. Oh my goodness you people will believe anything.
The southern strategy is a left wing fairy tale made for sheep made to change and hide 200 years of racism on behalf of the left, it never changed the political beliefs of either party....
It's just like Hitler said "The bigger the lie the more people will believe it".
The Imperial-
The reason Supreme Court appointments are for life and are not elected is so the justices don't have to worry about political ramifications of their decisions. Roberts' suprise ruling on ACA is one example. If he'd have had to worry about being re-elected by the RWNJs that put him in, he probably wouldn't have voted his conscience.
That's the reason the President appoints them, and the Senate has to confirm them. So that both of the other branches of government have to reach some form of agreement over their appointment.
There have been surprises over the years. Roberts on ACA, Blackmun on Roe v Wade.
It makes sense for things to be the way they are.
Of course, there is the downside of having activist neocons on the bench like Scalia and Thomas that we're stuck with until they die or retire.
@jimspence
I'm glad you cleared that up. We're only real, true Americans if we believe exactly like you do and vote as you tell us to. Ahhhh, no, but thanks for asking. You idea of what a real American is, well, it's kind of perverted and not exactly what America stands for. You can keep you 'REAL" American standards Adolf. Be a good little brown shirt and goose step right on outta here. "Real Americans", what a joke you are.
Wow, Elliot was taken to the woodshed on that one... Nice job Geowil!
btw Romney should know all about socialism, just look at the LDS (Mormon) Church.
Ten percent tithing enables an LDS member to obtain all sorts of safety net programs within the Church. From free food and clothing to employment opportunities to help with medical needs to children's daycare etc..
If Barack Obama cured cancer, Republicans would STILL want him out because;
Matt
As usual, you're a stooge.
http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-the-southern-strategy.htm
You keep trying to change history. It won't work. You're just not smart enough to pull it off.
Wrong Mark he is a socialist, you need to look up what that means , I did . 1. Political system of communal ownership:a political theroy system in which the means of production and distribution are controlled by the people and operated according to equity and fairness rather than market principles. 2 Movement based on socialism:a political movement based on principles of socialism, typically advocating an end to private property and to the exploitation of workers. 3 stage between capitalism and communism: in marxist theory, the stage after the proletarian revolution when a society is changing from capitalism to communism, marked by pay distributed according to work done rather than need. Ok , Mark since you think he's not now there you have it. go look it up
Matt-788276
"the left in this country is where 100 percent of the racism against minorities exists"
wow. I have read stupid comments before..but this one !!???
breadex
Hmmm, did you get that quote from the Liberal/Progressive revisionist history book?
I think the quote was more like this:
He also said:
By the way, you do realize that we are NOT a Democracy right?
We are a Federal Constitutional Republic with a Representative Democracy.
The Representative Democracy merely describes the type of government we have which allows periodic free elections. A Republic and a Democracy are not only dissimilar forms of government they are antithetical.
It’s a shame our criminal Public Education system doesn’t teach Americans what they really need to know about our government. No wonder our great Republic is finally succumbing to ben Franklins prediction:
Try to keep your quotes accurate.
ROMNEY/RYAN 2012 for real Americans
@CPaul
matt is showing off how ignorant he is. I think he did a fine job of it too. What do you think CPaul?
He is truly one of the dumbest people on the vine tonight and that's saying a lot.
Mike from AZ : The Imperial-
The reason Supreme Court appointments are for life and are not elected is ...Of course, there is the downside of having activist neocons on the bench like Scalia and Thomas that we're stuck with until they die or retire.
Thanks for your explanation and it was also along the line I read in a small constitutional reference book. As you mentioned it, the appointment of Justice Scalia, Thomas etc has always fallen along the political line as well. So the good intention of our forefathers did not work in that area. If the US public wants to curtail the influence of outside states in to our internal affairs, keep corporations out of our politicians pocket we need a working court. The only way we can guarantee that is when people hire them to do the work. The president electing them leads to favors in some instances. Some states actually elect their judges to some of the states high courts and seems to work in general public favor.
WHEN Obama CURES cancer I will vote for him. Until then I see only evidence of the Cancer and will vote it out of office when the time comes. Obama IS a cancer on America!
Wow! This thread is Alice in Wonderland. Go ahead and enjoy your government bennies for another generation. When the national debt hits $30Trillion and the world dumps the Dollar as the reserve currency I hope you all have a good generator and a pocket knife.
GHX: You are an IDIOT.
@ Dennis and Cpaul
Who started the KKK Ummm that would be the Liberals an on and on read my original post. Also Dennis are you telling me that the southern strategy of the 80's excuses 200 plus years of racism on behalf of liberals.
Most people, even on the right, are not aware of these FACTS as I am which makes it easy for clowns like you two to attack me. I see neither of you disputed the KKK claim or any other because you can't, you just tried to shift the blame from the Dems to the Repubs with your southern strategy fairy tale.
You're both brainwashed idiots and I'm done with you.....
Carl,
Settle down, I know it is getting toward the end of the month and you are waiting for your government check. It is only a few more days and then you can go back on the binge of your choice.
@Matt,
It was also a bunch of old white Republicans that started the NAACP.
LOL......The stupidity in America is getting more pathetic as time passes on.
OK, let's look at it another way:
See what I mean, republicans think they are better suited to screw America, and liberals think the same thing. Either way, I'll vote for Obama because I know who Romney is working for, and it won't be for you everyday, average people.
Yea, kind of like that letter Hoover wrote to Dr. King, acting like he was a black man denouncing Dr. King on some of his moves, and motives. White republican men are some of the worst Americans alive.
OBAMA/BIDEN....2012!!!!
Matt: The Southern Strategy is not a left wing fairy tale but reality. That you deny that says more about your inability to get beyond your ideology than anything else. You think that all those racist Southern Democrats just woke up one morning in the 50's and 60's and thought, "Gee, today I think I'll switch to the Republican Party." Check out the Wikipedia entry on Southern Strategy.
Conservatives ponder the reality of the GOP supreme ayatollahs not being able to cement the fascist ideology. waaaaaaaaaaaah It's easier and cheaper to buy judges than majorities in all the legislative branches. Obama a must in 2012.
G. Bud,
Just pass the joint and forget about posting on any forum. You are too high and do not make any sense.
Sorry, The Imperial, as much as I want to see Obama re-elected (and I truly do) and reshape the Supreme Court, those changes you mentioned would take Constitutional Amendments, not acts of Congress. And no amendments are going to pass two-thirds of the states in this day and age of polarized politics. The best I can hope for is an Obama win, an Obama Court and federal judiciary... and a Democratic congress, and for Sec. Clinton to be elected Pres. in 2016 and further liberalize the SC,...
Ernest Lee Frank,
Liberal, Liberal, Liberal, Liberal... are you done yet? How about we all just do it in the street.......
.
The same liberal ideology of live and let live, all while mandating CFL's, toilet size, and fountain soda limits... give me a brake!
it must be socialism when I'm willing to pay a portion of my taxes to make sure kids get an education, or have a roof over their head and food in their belly and clothes on their backs…. What you call Socialism I call being compassionate and being Human!.....Its still socialism either way you slice it and what happens when the money runs out? then what? You would have even more than 47% of the population on welfare and food stamps most of which who refuse to work! you can lead a horse to water but you cant make him drink it
Joan-1991647
Apparently you know very little about what's going on. Obama has brought this country back pretty far considering the last republican administration had us over a cliff.
The truth may hurt but kidding yourself will terminally harm you.
Jayman
The money has run out, it is time to make tough decisions when it comes to spending.
I hate all this socialist crap, lets put an end to it. I want to live in a country where only the little people pay taxes. Only the middle class's children fight our wars. What I want is to live in a country that is run by the best that money can buy plutocrats, who's whole political philosophy is based on the concept, "I got mine, f*^k you!" And we can have $50,000 a plate dinners where we can denounce all the free loaders, for what they are, parasites and ingrates. A country where we have the best doctors and hospitals, and can live a healthy lifestyle without worrying about how expensive health care has become, and if the others get sick, they can just die. Yes, and the big money Oligarchs keeping the economy growing by taking as much as they can get from the little people, through fees, closed tax breaks, and a union-less work environment. Down with President Obama and his socialist ways, up with Romney and his cheerful view of the American electorate. We be happy conservatives now!!
Pippo Schillaci
Wrong answer. We are closer to the cliff because of Obama.
For some reason none of the numbers add up????
Do you realize it takes 150,000 jobs per month just to cover the 'new kids" entering the job market.
That comes to 6.5 million jobs needed since Obama entered office.
Obama claims he has created 4.2
Sorry he's a couple million short of a six pack.
No person since the beginning of mankind has ever borrowed their way out of a financial disaster.
What makes you think Obama will be the first??
FORWARD??????
Fyi, when a president is republican, he appoints republican judges. when a democrat is president, he appoints democrat judges. WHY IS THIS NEWS? oh yeah, it must be that liberal media bias i hear so much about. lol
Barlow,
I hate all this individual responsibility and capitalism. The creation of the greatest society and wealth that the history of human history has seen must be stopped! People who have great ideas and want to better humanity should be stopped by the government because only 'they' know what is good for us. After all why should an individual be able to take risk when government can just choose investments for us?
See, sarcasm, I can do it too.
Dennis, you're an a$$wipe. Talk about somebody who thinks they know everything and has all the answers. Well, you don't. You are a vicious, condenscending nitwit who apparantly spends his days watching MSNBC and regurgitates their nonsense. At your age, time to get a job and an opinion of your own!
Unions .... so many side against them and so many have never been involved with them. Unions were formed to help out the workers who were so maligned by their employers. I do so hope most of you remember that Labor Day is a holiday that was to benefit Union workers.
I was married to someone that was in a Union long, long ago. Printshop union. (Trust me, there was one!) He was an apprentice and worked his way into a Journeyman. It was not an easy thing to do then and I'm not sure if it is one now. But if that still is the case, Unions are teachers and educators and they actually assist those that start off humbly to get to know their craft and obtain skills. I believe in Unions as they protect workers. I don't believe in Unions getting so big that they demand more than they need. They were designed to protect the humble workers that strived to get ahead. I still believe in them, I do not believe they should be asking for more than the average layperson is asking for.
I am a dichotomy. I believe in the human spirit and that we all want the end goal of a great Nation.
Obama/Biden 2012
Layton,
Under Obama, all you will get is the end of a great nation.
Here is how it works:
1. Politician makes promises to unions to get elected
2. Politician leaves office
3. Promises still need to be fulfilled
4. The United States is now $16Trillion in debt with $120Trillion in unfunded liabilities.
5. Your children and grandchildren now curse you for such irresponsibility.
Frankly, I'd hate to be in Mitt's shoes right now.
The Godfathers (Sheldon Adelson, Karl Rove, and the Koch brothers) have poured BILLIONS into his coffers.
It was an INVESTMENT, and they expect to get their RETURN.
Now Mitt can't deliver. We'll see what the goons do to him.
Should be entertaining, at least.
Wake up now!
I believe you just described the Congress and not the President. I vote, call, and e-mail my Congresspeople and Senators. I do NOT believe that the President is a dictator or King and can wave some mythical wand to make everything right.
My children and grandchildren respect me as I am standing for them and saying NO MORE TRICKLE DOWN FAIRY TALES!
Under Obama we received a LOT of Congresspeople who REFUSED to work towards making this country solvent. That is their shame and not his.
Obama/Biden 2012
Wake up -
We're not "broke".
GDP in this country is HIGHER today than it was before the recession.
The problem is that it's being taken and hoarded by the top 1% and NONE of it is going to the middle class.
If they won't keep it in this country and use it to grow the economy, we need to bring back the Eisenhower tax rates and make sure it stays here working for ALL of us.
Change in income and productivity since 1979
Change in GDP vs. pre-recession peak
Change in employment since pre-recession peak
That's what's wrong with America. And the GOP's solutions are all upside-down
You can't spend all your time pouring cement shoes on someone and then fault them for not running the marathon in record time.
We need to get the GOP out of the way and get back to fixing this country.
Layton,
Your generation left nothing but destruction, corruption, and debt for your grandchildren. You should be ashamed of yourself!
hey folks! You know something that is really cool on the 'Vine? The "block user" function... it's so nice seeing lunatics with names like "Wake Up Now" in empty boxes. And all the people who cry "socialist, socialists, blah, blah, blah".... if they have nothing constructive to say... block 'em! They pretty much go away. Meanwhile, have you seen the latest poll stats? Obama is nearing the double digit index over Romney. I know, no surprise but it sure makes me smile and I know it really cramps the haters style! Even Rasmussen and Fox (ultra conservative polling), has the President leading by a sizable margin:
PollDateSampleMoEObama (D)Romney (R)Spread
RCP Average
9/11 - 9/24
--
--
48.6
44.6
Obama +4.0
Bloomberg
9/21 - 9/24
789 LV
3.5
49
43
Obama +6
Rasmussen Tracking
9/22 - 9/24
1500 LV
3.0
47
46
Obama +1
Gallup Tracking
9/18 - 9/24
3050 RV
2.0
48
45
Obama +3
Politico/GWU/Battleground
9/16 - 9/20
1000 LV
3.1
50
47
Obama +3
National Journal
9/15 - 9/19
1055 LV
3.0
50
43
Obama +7
Associated Press/GfK
9/13 - 9/17
807 LV
4.3
47
46
Obama +1
Hartford Courant/UConn
9/11 - 9/18
1186 LV
3.0
46
43
Obama +3
Monmouth/SurveyUSA/Braun
9/13 - 9/16
1344 LV
2.7
48
45
Obama +3
NBC News/Wall St. Jrnl
9/12 - 9/16
736 LV
3.6
50
45
Obama +5
Pew Research/PSRAI
9/12 - 9/16
2268 LV
2.4
51
43
Obama +8
Have a nice day now... and watch those numbers soar as the debates progress. President Obama is gonna wallop Mittsy Flip Flop!
Conservative............... Now there's a word that needs to be defined in America. It is closer to fascist in real definition, the thing that should disturb real Americans is the fact that there are so many uneducated and under informed people out there that support the radical "New Conservative" agenda.
Freedom to these "Conservatives" means freedom for them and servitude for anybody that doesn't agree with them.... Like I said in America todays conservative is really todays fascist.
Not only does Citizens United need to be overturned, but we also need to prevent an even bigger threat, allowing individuals and corporations to make unlimited anonymous donations directly to a candidate. Citizens United was just a step on the way to that ultimate goal.
Matt
On top of everything else you can't read or comprehend. The Southern Strategy was a product Nixon in the 60's. Good grief you're ignorant.
Try as you might you can't pretend the KKK didn't migrate over to the Republican Party and found a welcoming home. The Democrats at the time couldn't wait to be rid of them. Those KKK types are just as disgusting today as they were in the 60's. So you really need to crack a book and stop trying to rewrite history.The tea party of today is very much like the KKK. Just as the Klan took over the Republican Party in the 60's the tp has polluted the Republican Party of today. Just another infestation of cockroaches.
I lived it and studied it Matt. You stand zero chance of getting over on me because you only listen to faux and Rush. They like to pretend they aren't what they are, a hate group.
I am concerned with our current supreme court rulings. the most pressing was on the healthcare act. The seemed so pressed to allow this socialistic law to be imposed that they actully broke their oth of office and no one will admit that. there was nothing constitutional about this bill. forcing us all to buy something from a privite corporation or be fined by the government is not what America is suppose to be. Since that was un constitutional the Supreme court came up with the plan to justify the asault on our freedoms by calling these fines a "tax" and congress has the powere to tax. No mindy you were were all told "this is not a new tax" by the President and many of those who pushed the bill through. Either they told the biggest lie of the century or they didn't actually think it was a tax. The only way I can imagine the court is calling this a tax is to believe that any money taken from us by our government is a tax. Never the less . If the only reason this bill is constitutional is because it is a tax then the bill is still unconstitutional and should be repealed. Our congress men and women should have the courage to re[eal this travisty to our constitution even though it has some good points. They should start over and get it right.
Getreal
Hey, if you don't like the truth it's a very sad thing. Nothing I posted was a lie and if you ever cracked a book you would know that. I didn't know it was elitist to actually know and understand history? You guys truly do not embrace education do you.
I can't help either you or Matt. All you have is hatred for anybody else but those exactly like you. I'm glad you don't like me. I try not to have people like you as friends. You're boring and one dimensional.
Dear Susan, Our founders where mostly educated men. they understood history. they knew that having a king or emperor was not the best form of gov. They took the best of each thriving gov. in history. From Greece they learned democracy, from the Romans they learned republic etc. They created a hybrid. combining rule of law, peoples rights, capitalism, socialism etc. NO PURE FORM WORKS. Russia and china proved that socialism and communism do not work. Having a police dept is socialism. the alternative is private security. we have both. fire dept and military also have socialist and private varieties. The words you throw around where created to divide America and other lands. America is not a couple of shinny seas, or a bunch or purple mountains. America is you and me. it is "we the people", not the land we stand on. not the corporations and not the government,. it's the old woman over there with the cane, it's the child that just ran past you laughing. It's that guy rushing to work. "WE THE PEOPLE"
Susan,
It's very impressive that you can copy a definition verbatim. However, can you apply it to prove your point? You know, if you're claiming Obama's what you just defined, show us. HOW has he conformed to that definition?
elliot: No answer, eh?
I didn't think so.
P.S.: Enjoy President Obama's second term. I'm sure going to.
Clinton 2016!
Wake up now
Do you need help with comprehension? go here...Now if I can only figure out where the chief hides the weed...
I do not know what the answers are. I only know what I believe and what I dislike. And the two major things I do not like are the following:
1. I do not like it when a sitting President of the United States has a campaign slogan of "I killed a person." I did not like it when President Bush said it. I do not like it when President Obama says it.
2. And I do not like a $1.5 Trillion deficit per year. If I ran my personal finance in a situation where I continuously spent more money then I was paid with no possible foreseeable change in that situation, the banks would already have my house, my car, and the shirt on my back.
Overturning Citizens United will only work temporarily. What needs to happen is a 28th Amendment that specifically states that a U.S. citizen is one with a birth certificate, a heartbeat, and a mother. Simply filing papers to "incorporate" does not make it a citizen.
COinFL,
I also agree 100%
The fact the GOP is worried that Obama could potentially change the leaning of the SCOTUS is one of the main reasons to vote for Obama. Any red blooded American that thinks the Citizen United was the right ruling really needs to just look at this election cycle and know it was a big mistake...or worse out and out corruption on the part of the purely Republican judges that allowed this travesty of justice to occur.
What are they pondering? It's already an Obama court.
There is nothing worse for the country than a politically motivated Supreme Court, regardless of the political persuasion of that institution.
joeyfromcali,
It is a very cut and dry thing, the difference between a democracy and a republic. For one we could never, ever be a true democracy because of the way our constitution is written. In a democracy the majority have the right to pass whatever laws or amendments they feel are correct and those in the minority are ignored.
This is what a pure democracy is, a place where everything is voted on by the population and whatever gets the most votes becomes law. For example you could do away with Civil Rights if you had enough votes in a democracy and nothing could be done until you have enough voters to overturn that edict.
This is actually how propositions to state governance work now. However these can be easily overturned by courts or by subsequent propositions. However in a full on democracy even national and federal laws, even the Constitution, could be changed in that same way.
In a republic however there is much more control. Think of a republic as a tame east to democracy's wild west approach. A republic blends together some of the aspects of democracy and some aspects of authoritarianism. We elect pseudo-dictators into political positions who then will probably follow through on what they had promised to do when elected. They represent their constituents in the federal government in their stead and vote on their behalf.
While this is true we also have another layer of democracy-light spread through our Legislative branch which is topped with a filling of dictatorship mixed with yet more democracy; creating an American sandwich.
Congress is essentially a democratic body of dictators even though that sounds completely convoluted. Bills pass or fail based on a democratic majority rules type of vote with some restrictions. These bills, even if passed, can be overthrown by two bodies:
1. The court system
2. The President
If a law enters the court system after being called into question it has the chance to be either upheld or stricken down and will progress through the court system until one side or the other gives up. If they do not it will reach the Supreme Court. Here we have another variant of a democracy tamed with a dictatorship. Rulings are handed down in democratic style with majority rules however only the Supreme Court can overrule their previous rulings.
As such most rulings are final until new Justices are put into place. In this way the SCOTUS is a dictatorial body, they have the power to not only determine if a law is constitutional they can also change the meaning of individual mandates in the Constitutions. Citizens United is a perfect example of this power.
The second body, the President, has far less power. The President can veto any bill he or she finds to be against the best interest of the nation. However this veto can be overruled by a 3/4ths re-vote in Congress. At the point that a veto is overruled the President is forced to sign said bill into law. From there it can remain uncontested or be sent through the courts.
This is what is meant by checks and balances. Each branch of Government has the ability to limit the power of the other or to somehow change a branches influence. For example President's get to assign SCOTUS Justices and they are assigned for life. The President can also appoint federal judges and so this give the President some method of influencing the climate of the lower courts. The SCOUTS, since it wields such great power, must remain impartial and not be swayed by party ideology in any of their considerations. The lower courts generally do not have such strict tenets though.
But that is getting a bit off track. As I said, our country is a contradiction in terms of what we are. We have layers of dictatorship and pure democracy spread through every facet of our Government. One could say that our Government style works because it is so messy and non-conformist. This makes it much harder to take total control over.
Matt-788276, Carl Lafoon, Get Real 2011, you're each suspended for a day for violating #1 of the Code of Honor.
What is the big deal? we already have an Obama court with Roberts there! GWB did it to us all. It was either Harriett or Roberts! and we got the idiot. I guess he was pissed that he could not appoint Harriett! If the edges of the Republican party, like the libertarians do not vote for mitt we will have full blown socialism, commie style next year!
I love Republicans talking about full blown socialism. What is that by the way? And "commie style", what is that?
The court has leaned to the right too long already, and has been activist especially in Citizens United.
The Supreme Court is supposed to be apolitical.
your penguins have more brains than you!
What's the matter, couldn't answer my questions?
"full blown socialism, commie style" is obvious! lol. its whatever rush tells his listeners it is. :)
The only socialism this court supports is CORPORATE SOCIALISM where RISK IS SOCIALIZED and PROFIT is kept PRIVATE.
No. The GOP is all out FASCIST. They will run ROUGHSHOD over HUMAN BEING'S RIGHTS just like they did when they declared CORPORATIONS PEOPLE.
Stop WATCHING FAUX NEWS and SEE THE LIGHT!
edwardo,
Are you trying to say that Robert's was put there by Obama? If so you are a fool!
To today's Republicans, "socialism" is anything Obama does that Bush or Reagan also did (health care mandate, AHCA, immigration reform, etc.) "Communism" is when the wealthy are allow to keep every dime they can steal and then lie about it as Romney did on his 2011 tax return.
Romney did Romneycare in Massacheusetts (not socialism) but when Obama did it it was socialism.
Bush instituted Medicare Part D which mandates that every individual at age 65 buy private prescription drug insurance and imposes a fine and a penalty if you don't (not socialism) but when Obama did it, it is socialism.
Reagan gave complete and unconditional amnesty to all illegal immigrants who had lived in the US for at least four years. That was 3.9 million new citizens that were Mexican and around 1.2 million from other countries. In addition "conditional" amnesty was given to 1.8 million additional illegal immigrants. That was called a "crackdown." When Obama signed the Dream Act that effected primarily serving military members and college graduates who came here as children (a total of 13,000-15,000 people) it was "communism."
Maybe it is more like: If you are a white male Republican, it okay. Otherwise it is evil and bad and socialist and evil.
Ther bottom like is that Republicans DESERVE four more years of Obama, followed by eight years of Hillary!!!!!
Hillary 2016!
Don't let the 1% buy our democracy !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I think Eric deserves an answer that's not ripped from Wikipedia. Please, Edwardo, explain to us what "socialism" is and, to be more precise, what "commie style" socialism is...the textbook definition of "commie style", though, not the colloquial definition.
Then, if you're able, please describe to us in detail how "full blown socialism" is what we're headed for...or...were you just blustering, using words you heard someone else use? Either way, once you've responded to this request appropriately, your opinion will no longer be viewed as laughable at best.
Speaking of lyin on tax returns, how about Ryan having to amend two years worth of tax returns to include income from a trust that he failed to include when filing? How about Romney engineering his 2011 tax return to bring the rate up to 13% from 9% by only declaring 2.1 million of his 4 million in donations to charity? Never-mind the fact that he has 3 years to file an amendment and claim it.
It is because of tricks like these, and forgetful memories that more tax returns should be released. The man is hiding something that he feels would end his political aspirations. What exactly is he hiding?
Ray in Jax: Your point about the ability to file an amended return is an excellent one. He could do it and we'd never know about it.
In all fairness I think the Supreme Court Justices should be picked by the Democratic party only, then we could do a 2000 "W" like the GOP did ( ""W" was an Interloper !!! )
Ray in Jax
What Romney is hiding are his greed and lack of ethical standards. Just because some fancy tax lawyer said that he (Romney) could 'get away with it' does not make it either right or just.
Wow, edwardo-1001200 spouts off some nonsense, is ask for facts and then disappears into cyberspace. It seems to be the standard operating procedure for paid conservative hacks. Beware conservatives. America is starting to see through your evil ways.
Hmmmm, "Conservatives warily ponder prospect of an 'Obama Court'. And we get to tax returns????? I think the libbies are stuck in one groove on the Obama rhetoric record. (For those of you who don't know what a record is, it's a vinyl disk that has the sound in grooves in the surface of the disk.)
Speaking of Oblameo's record, what do you libbies have on that one?
Conservatives always blow smoke at the thought of socialism. However they do the same things that democrats do so their outcry is meaningless. They are just upset that they are not the ones who put a signature to the bill. Get real people.....
To those of you saying only individual persons with money should be allowed to donate, I take it you feel the same about non-profits and advocacy groups?
Now Roberts is a turncoat!! What happened when he said corporations are"people" to pass the "united citizens" law? He was a full blooded conservative??
AJ,
It just goes to show you that you can't trust those lying conservatives!
ORB1943 wrote
Ummmmmmmm, maybe u didn't get the memo, Romney made 12 or 13 million and paid 2 million in taxes thats after the businesses he invested in paid 35 percent in taxes. Now here's the real jaw dropper he gave 4 MILLION TO CHARITY!!!!
Now how does that fit into your idiotic comment about Romney being greedy and unethical????
FYI Romney never broke any TAX LAWS EVER!!! Now pull your head out of your buns!!!!
Matt..........Romney rigged the 2011 returns so he would end up paying more taxes at 14%. He would have paid 9%. Is that ok with you when joe middle class pays double? Romney also would cut Capital gains to zip, so he would not be paying any taxes, also add the other tax breaks he wants to give to the greedy rich at the expense of the middle class again....And that is ok with you?...Not US! Time the greedy rich pay their fair share of taxes. You do not know if Romney ever broke any tax laws as he has only shown one complete. You would not know because the IRS does not tell info!
Romney statement says he paid what he owed. That leaves out the fact he could have been caught cheating and paid penalty. Romney says he was audited.....That is why the tax lawyers told him to use the word "OWED." His spokesperson would not answer any questions outside of the words he paid what was "OWED" Tax experts said this means he is hiding something bad.! Now pull your head out of a Romney!
Matt,
No he didn't break any laws, but he thinks what he pays is fair when I paid 20% fella! It isn't fair and he's just plain greedy. Giving $3,000,000 to the Church of Latter Day Saints Cult isn't charity to me either!
The simple fact is Obama believes YOU should get a check from the government and the rich should pay that check. Romney believes EVERYONE should have a shot at success, but Obama has you all convinced you can never make it in the real world so a $600 welfare check IS SUCCESS!!!!!.
When do I sign up for my $600 welfare check? I cannot wait to achieve Obama Success!
@starsailing and clwyd
First off yes star I do know Romney didn't break any tax laws because HE WAS NEVER CHARGED!!!!!!
I guess he's guilty until proven innocent RIGHT!!!!
And Clwyd the reason why he paid less and you paid more is because you paid INCOME tax on the JOB that you have. He paid CAPITOL GAINS on INVESTMENTS he made which CREATES A JOB FOR YOU.
That's how it works and that's why higher taxes don't, because higher taxes take money that would go to investment and consummer spending, which by the way expands our economy, and puts it in the hands of the idiots in our government who WASTE OUR MONEY!!!
This is the simple explanation which is all you can handle right now....
Matt, He didn't pay much more because he didn't work. 95% of his income came from interest and dividends! Also, he overpaid by 4@,000,000 because he saw that if he didn't his rate would have been 9%. Now he can go back and collect that money after the elections and we will never know! Also, his $3,000,000 he gave as charity to the Churchof Latter Day Saints Cult. was a deduction!
"the only thing we have to fear, is fear itself." So why does the right wing in any nation use fear as their tactic? When you have truth, you do not need fear. What we need is balance and cooperation. Not endless filibusters and going home early with nothing done, just so they can blame the president. People are getting smarter(at least most). America has woken up enough to at least try to progress. For those who hold on to hate and old ideas, no worries, your children will learn, your children will do the right things. you can slow civilization down for now, but eventually we will go forward.
From Softpedia:
I'm sure you may have heard the growing claims that the course of events in motion in the United States offer excellent premises for the installation of a Fascist rule and a police state. In this piece, I will not attempt to persuade anyone that this is or is not the case, but provide a view of status-quo from a legal perspective. A comparison between the new and old America may perhaps also be in order. Again, the goal is not to offend, but to provide a few bases for events that some people already construe as worrying, and detrimental to their freedoms.
A few definitions
According to Oxford University Press' A Dictionary of World History, “The inhabitants of a police state experience restrictions on their mobility, and on their freedom to express or communicate political or other views, which are subject to police monitoring or enforcement. Political control may be exerted by means of a secret police force which operates outside the boundaries normally imposed by a constitutional state.”
The general definition of a totalitarian regime states that it maintains itself in political power by means of an official ideology, as well as through propaganda disseminated through the state-controlled mass media. Other features include a single party that controls the state (usually), personality cults, control over the economy, regulation and restriction of free discussion and criticism, the use of mass surveillance, and widespread use of state terrorism.
In its modern use, the word tyrant refers to a person in a position of power who tends to put his or her personal interests, or that of a small oligarchy, over the interests of the general population. In seemingly democratic states, this happens even if that person was selected in his or her position following free elections. In classical political sciences, the word also refers to a person who has taken a position of power outside of hereditary (no longer applicable except for monarchies) or constitutional frameworks.
One of the two main definitions associated with the concept of dictatorship refers to a single person, or a small group of people, controlling the government of a country. The second definition refers to an autocratic form of rule, in which the people, or person, in charge do(es) not abide by, or simply dismantle, laws, constitutions, as well as social and political factors in the state.
Propaganda, in its most basic form of acceptance, refers to using speeches, media channels, and other means for disseminating information to the general public. The general purpose of propaganda is to influence the masses so as they rally to a cause, or a point of view, established by the ones who engage in this type of action. Propaganda is regularly used by powerful groups, such as those of religious people around the world, governments, and their leaders.
Fascism
Obtaining total control on a state without raising the suspicions of the general public is something that is incredibly difficult to do. As one who has studied the world's political systems, doctrines and ideologies, I can tell you that a Fascist-type, totalitarian state is extremely difficult to construct. There are two possible ways to go about it. One is the direct path, such as the one taken by Adolf Hitler when he became the ruler of Germany, in 1933. The other one takes longer, but creates the proper conditions for the people seizing control, in the sense that their take-over will not be hostile, and will be met with minimal resistance. This carries the advantage that fewer opponents can be more easily silenced.
Hitler did something that was actually pretty smart in taking over Germany. After his first failed attempt at glory, which landed him in jail, he set out to conquer political power by taking over the state via democratic means. As proof of this, consider the fact that his party won the 1933 race in free elections. The thing the to-be Fuhrer did was use the mechanisms of propaganda, and fear, to instill the desire in the masses to vote for him. Once he was in a position of power, he cleverly manipulated President Hindenburg into granting him emergency, executive powers, which he never gave up until his death.
The thing that you need to keep in mind from this is the fact that these powers were given to him in response to the social turmoil that permeated Germany at the time. But the unrest was caused by Hitler's paramilitary groups, the SA, themselves. In other words, the Fuhrer set his own stage, and managed to play everyone so cunningly that he became the absolute ruler of Nazi Germany. Just six years later, in 1939, the Second World War began.
Some concerned groups are saying that this is not the way employed by the US elites today. They argue that these people move much more slowly, taking their time to build control. They slowly undermine the people's basic freedoms and rights, and all while arguing that they boost them. For example, the Patriot Act was touted by then-president George W. Bush as being a document that enabled government agencies to communicate with each other more efficiently. However, critics have pointed out that the law also enabled the state to gain more control over people's lives.
This was done by allowing the government easier, and unconstitutional access, to people's homes and private affairs. Intercepting e-mails and tapping telephones can indeed be a good measure in fighting terrorism, but the warrants that were required in order for these actions to be legal had their role. They were supposed to protect citizens from abuse by authorities. A judge had to be presented with facts, or at least founded suspicions, before he or she released authorizations to intercept private communications. But, at this point, the government is free to do this at its whim.
US authorities can also now search people's houses without their knowledge, and without them being present at the inspection. In other words, while you are out working for some corporation, government agents are at your house, searching for any signs of suspicious activity. This type of behavior is unconstitutional, illegal, and against the most basic human rights. But, as some have correctly pointed out, people tend to put their security first. Under the pretext that they are enhancing security, officials can pass and enact laws that strip away people's rights. The thing to keep in mind here is that they do so with the express permission of the people.
Another thing that the US piece of legislation did was define what a terrorist was. One of the definitions in the Patriot Act (sec. 411) is “a political, social or other similar group whose public endorsement of acts of terrorist activity the Secretary of State has determined undermines United States efforts to reduce or eliminate terrorist activities.” This means that the power of decision falls under the Secretary of State. What if this Act was put into force when Martin Luther King Jr. was speaking to the crowds? We would have had him, Rosa Parks, and other activists labeled as domestic terrorists.
Under the same document “Engage in terrorist activity” means, in an individual capacity or as a member of an organization, to commit or to incite to commit, under circumstances indicating an intention to cause death or serious bodily injury, a terrorist activity; to prepare or plan a terrorist activity; to gather information on potential targets for terrorist activity; to solicit funds or other things of value for a terrorist group.
Additionally, as per the same document, “An alien [foreign national] detained solely under paragraph (1) who has not been removed under section 241(a)(1)(A), and whose removal is unlikely in the reasonably foreseeable future, may be detained for additional periods of up to six months only if the release of the alien will threaten the national security of the United States or the safety of the community or any person.” Again, we see the use of the term national security, which is one of the most ambiguous terms in the world today.
Just like the word terrorism, the words national security can hardly be defined, and it's precisely this fact that allows for abuses to be carried out in their cover. The Patriot Act has many provisions that are frightening to me, at least, as one who has read a little bit of history. It puts unprecedented powers in the hands of fewer individuals, and claims to enhance freedoms, while at the same time reducing them considerably. I will remind you that Nazi Germany also applied the same method of keeping people in check. The only difference is that they did it upfront.
But one of the major achievements of the US legislation that was released after the 9/11 attacks was the creation of “patriots.”.From a political standpoint, I am not a nationalist. This means that I have studied the issue of patriots closely, as a potential threat for social orders. These people take their love of the country to heights where they are willing to throw out other citizens, who tend to disagree with them. This is seen today in the excessive use of the term “unpatriotic” and “unAmerican,” especially by people who are fanatics about the position, power and role in the world of the US. It is very often used against groups who tend to disagree with them on government policies.
Unfortunately, this is becoming increasingly common in the US today, as people who dissent their government's decisions, or dare question some of the laws in effect, are deemed unAmerican. This is a very dangerous course of events, I believe, simply because the freedom of speech appears not to matter anymore. When confronted with a question related to this issue, any “patriot” will tell you that this is unimportant, when considering the greatness of the country.
This amazes me when thinking about the reaction that conservative people had when President Obama wanted to introduce a new healthcare reform. All over Fox, the entertainment channel, TV show hosts and their guests called the president and his measures Socialist, which is hardly the case. My bachelor degree work was focused entirely on Socialism and its influence on wars around the world. As such, I studied the differences between Socialism, Communism and Capitalism closely, and I can honestly tell you that Obama is not moving for instating a Socialist approach.
Doing so would imply making the healthcare system public in the true sense of the word. Each person would need to pay yearly contributions, there would be little to no private health-insurance companies, healthcare would be free for all, the state would own the hospitals, and so on. Obama is trying to extend coverage to include more people, which makes a certain amount of sense considering that about 50 million Americans are currently uninsured. So, as I was saying, why do some people oppose this type of measures, while at the same time behaving in a nationalistic manner. Let me remind you that the Nazi Party was called the National-Socialist Labor Party of Germany.
The Traits of Fascism
Here are the defining characteristics of fascism, as evidenced by political analyst Dr. Lawrence Britt, who has studied this doctrine in the case of Germany, Italy, Spain, Indonesia and Chile. See for yourselves how many of them apply to the US right now.
1. powerful and continuing nationalism
2. disdain for the recognition of human rights/usurping human rights
3. identification of enemies/scapegoats as unifying causes for the population
4. supremacy of the military (or mercenary groups in the case of the modern US)
5. controlled mass-media
6. obsession with national security
7. religion and government are interwined (bulls eye!)
8. corporate power is protected
9. the government is male dominated (sexism)
10. labor power and unions are suppressed
11. disdain for the intellectuals and the arts
12. obsession with crimes and punishment
13. rampant cronyism and corruption (most leaders are related to each other)
14. fraudulent elections (made easier by electronic voting machines)
While some of these traits can easily be identified in the United States today, some require a bit of explaining. The first three points are clear enough, but the fourth is a bit tricky. To get the main idea, know that there are currently more than 100,000 mercenaries in Iraq and Afghanistan, all working alongside the US military, and sometimes even offering protection for its commanders. These groups operate outside of military law, and are ran by private corporations, such as Blackwater USA.
The media is not as much controlled, as it rallies to the stated objectives of the government. In the US, there is a long history of the media having ties with the establishment, for the simple reason that the major newspaper and TV owners have a lot of high-placed friends. No one would want to have their friends talk badly about them, and the same holds true here. Independent media is hard to come by these days, mostly because many sites and stations advocate wild conspiracy theories. Therefore, most free media is discredited, and people really believe when large networks ridicule some people's honest attempts at making some things public.
Points six to nine are also clear, and there are many people in the US, especially those in ultra-conservative, White, highly religious, and far-right groups who believe that this is the way things are supposed to be. They are currently lobbying for a greater influence of religion in the way America is run, which is naturally troublesome. The freedom of belief is stomped on, as these individuals believe they know what is best for everyone under their own beliefs.
Let me end this section by quoting Benito Mussolini, the leader of the Italian Fascist Party in World War II. He said that fascism was, “the merger of corporate and government powers.” Now, what is the difference between what this implies, and the Republican-promoted K Street Project?
edwardo-1001200, you're suspended for a day for violating #1 of the Code of Honor.
This only illustrates just how backward the political world has become. An Obama court would be conservative. The extremists and activists on the far right on the Supreme Court have worked to shred the constitution and create an entirely different set of laws and rules, benefitting their ideology first and only.
Check out Jeffrey Toobin's new book, THE OATH and listen to the recent NPR:Fresh Air interview (this site wouldn't let me link it). People have no idea just how radical the conservatives on the court actually are.
Here's the link, it was a fascinating story.
http://www.npr.org/2012/09/17/161144225/oba
Based on some of the recent decisions and rulings by conservative judges at the state and federal levels, I think many of us have a pretty good idea how whacked these people are!
Well said, @Sonny,
Obama is a Constitutional Scholar with as very long list of CONSERVATIVE writings from both his time as editor then president of the Harvard Law Review, as a lawyer for two years, and as a Senior Lecturer (the law school equivalent of a full academic professor) in Constitutional Law for twelve years. The Republicans (including both Romney and Ryan) do not like to talk about his publication record as a HLR Editor, as a lawyer (very pro-corporation) and as a Constitutional scholar. The Republicans claim that he published zero in the HLR (a lie) and nothing to rise to Senior Lecturer and be offered tenure (he turned it down three times) --- another lie. The problem the Republicans have is that Obama's writings are primarily pro-individual rights and some pro-business rights, though nothing on the scale of Citizens United.
It's okay, the Republicans will get him for another four years and they can worry about that while they get ready for Hillary to run.
We have a court now that supports the Oligarchy in virtually every ruling. Oligarchies throughout history have always either turned into fascist states or led to bloody revolution. It's hard to get more radically right wing than that. Conservative it is not. Even Regan would be considered a "radical liberal" by these war mongering, intolerant tea baggers and company.
ugh, this is why marijuana should never be legal....
Good stuff Eric, very interesting take on two gentlemen from Harvard, with different political views but coming together for the common good. That's rare, these days
Worried? This is the court that decided that corporations were 'people' for the sake of campaign donations, yet allowed the CEOs to still maintain the corporate veil for personal asset protection. We NEED a change in the robed wonders.
Agreed.
What we really need is a constitutional amendment patterned after the 28th Amendment proposed by MoveToAmend.org. This will prevent the "robed wonders" of either persuasion from dicking around with our campaign finance laws like the Supreme Court neutered Montana's 100 year old initiative passed law prohibiting corporate campaign contributions.
Why is it the person Mr. Corporation, can make unlimited and unsourced contributions and we, Mr. REAL human person citizen is limited to $2500 and have to even disclose our professions, address and phone number? Even unions had to disclose where the money came from except now, thanks to Citizens United (what an oxy-moron term) can give the same as corporations? If you are a billionaire, you can create your own PAC, fund it with 100% of your own money to get around the $2500 personal limit.
Fight back, vote democrat all the way, president, senator, representative, mayor, governor, drain commissioner and even dog catcher!
Obama/Biden and all the other offices in 2012. Hilary in '16
well Peggy, he is certainly who is trying to "run the country" right into the ground for the average American. Pity is, it's worked for him... due to the ignorance and lack of education the average republican voter has.
THe lefty socialist commies do not want a constitution, they just want their way, like babies who cry and whine all of the time, even when they get what they want! Obama and the demonrats cannot in good faith even take the oath of office, because it calls from them to defend the constitution which they hate! and in ONE nation, under GOD! ohhhhhhh, no God in the Demorat party thinking! hypocrites and traitors.
That's funny that sounds like the Republicans after the Obamacare ruling.
Republicans think they know what's in the Constitution, but not really know.
Socialists? The Democrats? It was the currently seated (Conservative) court that took us one hell of a step closer to socialism by giving corporations the same standing as individuals, thus saying big business has the same standing as an individual Citizen. THAT'S socialism! And, for your information, I'm a Democrat and I believe in God, so stop regurgitating the toxic garbage you hear on Faux news.
Seems like you really do not have the capacity to understand that what the court did when they made that ruling was place every Citizen into the chains of economic slavery. But, for those who refuse to learn, I am reminded of the old saying ... never try to teach a pig to crow - it'll frustrate you and irritate the pig.
Funny, its the republicans who want to add amendments for everything short of stubbed toe.
BIDEN WAS RIGHT! We will ALL be in chains to the CORPORATIONS! Don't you middle class GOP members realize this? YOU ARE AIDING THE SLAVERS!
VOTE PROGRESSIVE! THROW OFF YOUR CHAINS!
The GOP wouldn't know the real Constitution if it bit them on the behind. They've got their religious zealotry about the Constitution just like they have it about religion, and won't listen to reason on either topic no matter how many facts you throw at them.
@tag --- since Teddy Rooseveld, the GOP has proposed an astounding 700 amendments to the Constitition to the Democrats' 12. They hate the Constitution and essentially want it thrown out or amended to death.
The last successful GOP-proposed amendments were Prohibition (later repealed) and the change if Senators to being directly elected (against when is stated in the Constitution.)
And Republicans take the oath of Norquist before taking the oath of office they were elected to. Is that un American and treasonous or what edweirdo?
Sorry eduardo, but there is no place for God in politics, whether you like it or not. You know, that whole "separation of church and state" thing?
Wanting religion in politics is called a Theocracy. If that's what you want, feel free to move to one.
Might I suggest Iran?
God in Politician? I guess they want to what the Middle East is having.
I guess being both branch out from Old Testament, Christian and Muslim have a lot more in common than they think.
edwardo-1001200THe lefty socialist commies do not want a constitution, they just want their way, like babies who cry and whine all of the time, even when they get what they want!
Edwardo, I see you're back trolling again. You claim it's the left that wants their way but as I see it, it is the Right that want it their way or the highway. For some reason it seems the Right believes they are entitled to rule, that the left has no right to anything. So Edwardo, or Edward, go find some right wing hate website and troll there.
Stephen-3584703
The GOP wouldn't know the real Constitution if it bit them on the behind. They've got their religious zealotry about the Constitution just like they have it about religion, and won't listen to reason on either topic no matter how many facts you throw at them.
A "high-five" to that post! Those Christian Right sorts love to taut the Bible... trouble is, they haven't a clue what is in it. If they did, they would know that Jesus was NO REPUBLICAN, by anybody's standard. He was all about helping the poor, sick and downtrodden. Sad for them, but almost funny in a most ironic way huh? The Christian Right, used to call themselves "the moral majority" however, it's become very apparent they are neither.
Everyone should be worried about what Obama might do. He's already got the court in his pocket, allowing him to pass Obamacare, which, as the court reminded us, taxes the middle class. If he is re-elected, look for more middle class tax hikes - guaranteed....
roberts is in obama's pocket? really? do tell.
Actually, CYSS, "Obamacare" was upheld by the Supreme Court. They didn't pass it, but I'm sure that's what you meant to say. The fact that it was upheld by the court was a complete and utter surprise to everyone. Justice Roberts is in Obama's pocket? Does Justice Roberts know about this? LOL
Pay your taxes, get medical care, stop whining.
If you are by chance talking to me, Stephen, I do pay my taxes(income and otherwise), a higher rate than Romney, I have employer provided health care, and I don't whine, I get even.
O&Joe 2012!
4 more4 44
AlaskaGirl--Why would I be replying to you? The reply button is for Mr. Socialism's post, if I were responding to another comment I'd specify to whom. (<-- look, grammar! I must be a liberal interlectshul aleet!!)
I did say "if you are by chance talking to me". Geez. What in the hell does your grammar comment have to do with anything? But, okay, you opened the door to punctuation. You should have used a period at the end of your sentence that reads "The reply button is for Mr. Socialism's post". You're welcome!
Once again, you seem to be taking everything I say as targeting you. I agree with your views. I am joking about the fact I used "to whom" in my post because the right-wing is anti-education and anti-intellectual.
You must chill.
Ok, my bad! Sorry for my biting words and coming back at you. When I saw your comment 6.3 it sounded like a typical right wing response so I automatically assumed........no, one should not assume! I will chill! Thanks! LOL
:)
Lefties bashing each other - too funny.
Oh, what's the matter Socialism? Cant' find anyone to play with? The difference between the right and the left is that those of us on the left can discuss our differences with each other in a civil manner without calling each other vile and vulgar names and we aren't bashing each other as you put it. So, why don't you just mind your own business. Typical troll.
@AlaskaGirl-759554
Don't forget the most common use of "Burn in hell" if you have different opinions than the right.
The tax you are referring to is the $750 if you don't want to get insurance? What about the tax YOU impose on the rest of us if you need medical care and you are uninsured, usually at a far higher cost because if you don't have insurance, your ailment will most likely be more advanced and more expensive to treat. We, as a nation/state pay for that in the form of higher medical costs or direct subsidy. Costs will have gone down soon if not already because insurance companies now have to pay out 80% in claims. If they do not, they must refund their customers...simple as that. If your insurance is paid for by your employer, he/she will be saving money on premiums. If you pay for your own or part of it, yours will come down too. I am personally tired of paying some free-loading conservatives way.
Which you will only pay if you do not have health insurance.
I for one am sick of footing the bill for everyone that can afford insurance but would rather freeload the emergency rooms and skip out on the bill.
People call the AHCA socialism but are ignorant to the fact that what we had before it, was pure socialism.
So, do you have health insurance? If so, why are you complaining about soon not having to foot the bill for every deadbeat that doesn't?
NO difference between the UAW, AFL-CIO, SCIU and corporations, the unions are all LLC's limited liability CORPORATIONS! and they are no different than a corporation in leadership, structure or function. except union's smell bad! THe lefties scream the loudest when they cannot give unlimited sums of money, and they cannot get registered voters, and if they think the REpublicans are cheating at the polls, but they could care less if it is ACORN, AARP, or the unions doing it.
No one besides some one who is eligible to cast a ballot should have the right to interfere. Unlimited campaign contributions.
No PACS and no unions, and no anonymity.
I have a better idea: IF YOU CAN'T VOTE FOR HIM, YOU CAN'T GIVE TO HIM!
I am from WISCONSIN and am SICK AND TIRED of the outside interests - people that have NEVER EVEN BEEN TO WISCONSIN - BUYING our government and supreme court. DISGUSTING!
I am for STRICT, STRICT limits on individual donations, no non-voter donations THEN disclose every donation.
THIS IS DESTROYING DEMOCRACY!
SRS ... Very well said! I totally agree!
SRS-798254 --
I agree with what you say. I have a question for you, that as a Wisconsin(ite?) you may be able to answer: Is it possible that the failed recall effort of Gov Scott Walker was due to the people of Wisconsin resenting the influx of national media and influence into their state affairs? I mean, I have heard theories that the people of Wisconsin were sending a message that they don't like unions, or that they embrace Republican policies, but could it be something else? Just asking.
I'm a Wisconsinite too and I can tell you that Walker's original election was a fluke, and happened because it was a Republican wave year and not enough was known about Walker at the time - especially about how he tried to kill unions in Milwaukee county and how he left the county with a huge deficit. He wasn't recalled because the events of February 2011 were far removed from the recall election in June 2012.
The best thing about the recall elections is that the GOP lost control of the senate, thus blocking Walker's attempt to stuff more bad legislation through in a special session. This year it looks like it'll be a Democratic wave here, which says a lot about how people really feel about Walker and the 80,000 jobs we've lost because of his policies.
The Republicans hate to discuss that by keeping donors secret, there are huge fundraising efforts overseas. Even Romney was raising funds in Israel and England hoping that a few millions in illegal campaign contributions would make it his way.
@shrekk,
A lot of Democrats voted against Walker's recall on principle. They felt that when a man is elected that he whould have a whole term to be a success or failure on his own. Walker has failed, but he has done it without the help of Democrats. All self-inflicted wounds.
True Chris, but the polls about Walker from February-June 2011 showed that Barrett would win if the election were held again. Those polls had flipped a year later, and that was my point about the distance in time between the events. For the 8-10 months between the recall petition certification and the recall election, Walker was working to survive the recall and did his best to soften his image to the voters.
And since the anti-union law was recently overturned in large part, all Walker really accomplished was to shoot his party in the foot. It was a pyrrhic victory for the GOP, and they lost members in both the assembly and the senate.
I just hope that the next time we elect a governor it's one who at least has a college degree, and who wasn't booted out of college for ethical violations.
edwardo-1001200 you need some help there I have read your posts sounds like you believe in conspiracies everywhere...
Jeez, gdale6, stay up tonight until you can punctuate and capitalize that mess so that it makes sense. What a mess. I agree with your sentiment, but your style needs a lot of help in order for you to be taken at all seriously.
The funny part is in Wisconsin recall, GOP spent 10 times more money and most of those money are from out of state funding.
We should have laws to prevent that, only people in that state and have been there for at least 5 years should be allow to contribute.
My guess for Obama's first SCOTUS vacancy fill in a new term would be neither Kennedy nor Scalia. It would be Thomas. There are several reasons: a) Thomas never had a high-earning job. His wife currently brings in more money (from her "conservative" lobbying) than he. b) Thomas has never been treated as a peer by the other Justices, c) Thomas's health is unknown, but his race and background make him very susceptible to hypertension and sudden death.
The second most likely to be replaced would be Ginsberg who has fought both colon and pancreatic cancer.
This is the exact reason i want Obama to win. More liberal judges on the Supreme Court. Electoral vote- Obama 332, Romney 206. Go Obama 2012 !!!
this is only one reason why obama has to go..........
No way. Romney WILL lose. Romney wont get Ohio or Florida. Its done.
If Willard loses in FL, he's toast. However, it's looking like Ohio is a real stretch also. Remember, its all about math.
Actually Royalstar05, I wouldn't want a "Liberal" court. What I would like is a court without ideologues with an axe to grind. Rather thoughtful individuals who would apply the law in truly fair and impartial manner sticking with the merits of the case as it relates to the Constitution...of course to neocons that would be Liberal.
The only state of the battleground/tossup/competitive/tipping point states in which Romney is still winning are North Carolina (where his lead is shrinking rapidly) and West Virginia. If Romney loses either Florida or Ohio, he must then carry every other "battleground" state to win ---- Nevada, Colorado, Iowa, Wisconsin, Ohio, Pennsylvania, New Hampshire, North Carolina, and West Virginia. He's toast.
Headlines in my cities newspaper in Pa. Obama ahead by 8 points in Pa. Good news unless you're a Republican.
You don't want a "Dewey Wins by Landslide" premature victory proclamation. If people think it's already in the bag, they might not bother to go to the polls and vote. Because of the potential for critical Supreme Court nominations, the outcome of this election will impact America for a long time. Do your civic duty and cast your vote this November!
Still no article on this site about Harry Reid telling reporters that Romney has 'sullied his faith'.
I guess NBC has given up even the appearance of journalistic integrity in order to get their boy re-elected.
Disgusting. Foxnews.com has been breaking it all day - this is why you really have to compare the two sites to see where NBC (with it's half-truths, misleading article titles and content omissions) falls short of being impartial.
You would put a LIE like THAT on ANY news outlet?
They didn't put the MITT ROMNEY IS A FELON story here either. It seems fair to me...
Here's one you check the video out on:
"After his wife's plane was forced to make an emergency landing this weekend, Romney told the Los Angeles Times, he was worried for her safety. The candidate then continued on a bizarre tangent that showed just how little the Republican nominee understands about flight.
“I appreciate the fact that she is on the ground, safe and sound. And I don’t think she knows just how worried some of us were,” Romney told the paper. “When you have a fire in an aircraft, there’s no place to go, exactly."
Romney said the biggest problem in a distressed aircraft is that "the windows don’t open. I don’t know why they don’t do that. It’s a real problem. So it’s very dangerous."
The main reason airplane windows don't open is because there isn't enough oxygen at cruising altitude to keep passengers alive. (The fear of window or cabin failures, which would lead to potentially fatal hypoxia, is why many planes are equipped with emergency oxygen masks.)
"You can’t find any oxygen from outside the aircraft to get in the aircraft, because the windows don’t open," Romney told the Times, suggesting that additional oxygen in the cabin during the electrical malfunction could've alleviated the problem. In fact, if there were an electrical fire on board, additional oxygen would have fed the flames.
Strangely, Romney seemed to acknowledge the importance of oxygen later in his comments. "Fortunately, there was enough oxygen for the pilot and copilot to make a safe landing in Denver," he said."
I know something else that will suck the oxygen right out of a room ---- GOP trolls. ROFL Romney really IS that stupid. And Ryan, like Palin before him, has delusions of running for President in 2016. Against Hillary!!!! ROFL.
Sen. Reid made an inappropriate comment about Gov. Romney. It was rather stupid and he should apologize. However, I don't see why it should be a "breaking news story". Here are a sample of other headlines from other news sources "Obama condemns global extremism" - BBC, "Obama urges unity against global extremism" - Al Jazeera, Consequences of a nuclear Iran 'imense,' Obama says at UN. Nearly every media outlet has this in its headlines, save Foxnews. They are leading with Harry Reid saying unkind things about Mitt Romney. How is that important?
Somewhere is a lovely picture of Obama trying to work an umbrella as he walks through a gate, he makes Romney seem brilliant.
Reid didn't actually say the words, that Romney has, "sullied his faith" as you claim.
He merely said that he agreed with an author who wrote that.
"In a blog for the Huffington Post, Gregory A. Prince, a Mormon author and former Romney supporter, wrote that the presidential candidate had damaged the religion with his remarks.
"His arrogant and out-of-hand dismissal of half the population of this country struck me at a visceral level, for it sullied the religion that he and I share -- the religion for which five generations of my ancestry have lived and sacrificed, the religion whose official mantra is 'to take care of the poor and needy throughout the world,'" Prince wrote. "My first impulse was to rent an airplane towing a banner: 'Mitt Romney is Not the Face of Mormonism!'"
"He said (Prince) that Romney has sullied the religion that he, Prince and Romney share," Reid said. "And he’s so disappointed that in his words, ‘It’s a good religion and he’s hiding from it.’"
"I agree with him," Reid continued. "[Romney's] coming to a state where there are a lot of members of the LDS Church ... They understand that he is not the face of Mormonism."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/25/harry-reid-mitt-romney-mormonism_n_1913356.html?utm_hp_ref=politics
The stupid ones are the ones who think Romney was serious about rolling down windows on a plane. He was actually laughing when he said it, and waited for an audience response. Either a lot of people didn't bother to watch the video, or are just dishonest enough to pretend that they believe it was serious.
Romney simply stated that 47% of the people who get government handouts would not be likely to vote for him, it is a perfectly logical statement. Just as the 47% who believe that if you work hard, and believe that the person owns the government not the other way around, would likely vote for Romney. He gives a higher percentage to Charities, then Obama and Biden combined. He walks the walk and talks the talk. Obama only talks the talk, but never walks the walk.
He giggles at the dumbest things. The trees are just the right height, the water is just the right color of blue. He sounds like a kindergarten teacher reading us "See Jane Run". Hey, that is what he is doing, grooming Anne to run against Hilary in 2016! See Anne Run.
Sorry ,but Fox news has zero credibility. They are not even a news channel,more an entertainment channel. Why do you suppose that people who watch no news at all know more about what's happening than those who watch Fox. DUH!
Fox News: Another Rupert Murdoch winner. The same people who gave you phone tapping the parents of a kidnapped girl who ended found dead by a newspaper looking for REAL NEWS. Might as well watch Rush Limbaugh. Why waste your time with fake news. Go right to someone who doesn't try to wrap up one sided, select fact reporting to look like real news.
stacking the supreme court is just one more thing to worry about from obama.......obama is a poison pill for our nation......a vote for obama is a vote for national suicide..
Empty words
At least you're not being melodramatic.
National suicide is people who wouldn't know socialism if it ran them over in the street throwing that term around against anything they don't like. National suicide is people with the right to vote who think it's ok to make up your own facts to support every nutcase argument they make. National suicide is following the dictates of an unelected demagogue who has ruled that the rich shall enjoy the benefits of our country without paying for them. National suicide is attacking the independence of the judiciary because it has the temerity to actually read and enforce the Constitution, not that fictitious version that the haters seem to know by heart. National suicide is putting a bumper sticker on your car that promotes "Religious Freedom" and then tries to stuff their twisted version of Christianity down everyone else's throat. National suicide is blaming Obama for a debt that the Republicans ran up before he was ever elected by the policies they made and the laws they enacted. National suicide is a party dedicated to defeating their opponent regardless of the damage their hateful intransigence inflicts on the country.
National suicide, however, is decidedly not, in any way, shape or form, voting for Barack Obama.
Oh, well said highinfovoter!
I would call SS socialism, I would call ObamaCare socialism, I would call any government program that forces the public against their will to buy into a program that they choose not purchase in the first Place. If I did not own a vehicle, why should I have to purchase auto insureance? It is the same thing. And now that the court decided that it is a tax, the government can now tell us that we have to purchase anyting they want you to buy. It could be the latest electric vehicle, or green home, or US bonds. People would all have to buy it. You may laugh, but now the law is in place. I laugh because people are buying Gold and Silver. Those that are old enough can remember when the Government said we can no longer own them and had to sell them back to the government or face penalties. Our rights are being taken away and everyone cheers. I am sorry, but my family will not be voting for Obama, I just hope it doesn't take a decade to repair the damage he has done. I was hopeing he would have learned that FDR's program for recovery didn't work then and it hasn't worked for us now over the past 4 years.
The republithugs are just upset that the shoe is now on the other foot. After having the run of court appointments for 20 of the last 32 years (and getting a 'bad break' with aging justices), they see their advantage slipping away....
Michael, if you don't want to buy insurance, don't. But if you get sick and need medical care, don't run up our costs by making us treat you through higher medical costs, insurance costs, tax costs. Just as a senator once said, the republican health care bill is if you get sick, hurry up and die. $750 tax for uninsured is not all that high. You mentioned car insurance. I don't own a car, therefore I don't need auto insurance, but I DO own a body and I probably should have insurance on it because there is one thing we should know, sometime in our lives, our body's WILL break down and need fixing. One of the best things about the ACA (Obamacares act) is insurance companies can no longer bilk it's customers. They have to pay out 80% in care costs. They WERE paying out more in the neighborhood of 50 to 60%. You should really read at least the abbreviated version (plain English) of the bill.
I love when the Tea Party whines and cries when things just don't go their way. What are they going to do, take their balls and bats and go home. If they did, that would be great. The sooner they disappear from american politics, and it's already starting to happen, the better. A fake reform party that always was nothing but a radical right wing party looking to undermine Obama. I have never seen such a low life class of candidates in my life. Mitt Romeny isn't one of them, but unfortunatley he represents them and he's beginning to sound just like them: dumber and dumber every day.
I'm guessing Ginsberg will be the first to retire if Obama is reelected. In addition to her age, she has a few health issues. To be honest, I'm surprised she hasn't retired yet rather than risk her seat being filled by a Republican.
I don't see Scalia retiring until the election of a Republican president. In fact, he has pretty much said as much in the past, when he mentioned that he didn't want to see his work undone by his successor.
Kennedy is another likely selection for retirement in an Obama second term, and an Obama appointee for Kennedy's successor will probably provoke a major fight in the Senate. Kennedy has been the swing vote since O'Connor's retirement and Republicans will do whatever it takes to ensure that swing vote is not too liberal. Unlike Democrats, Republicans would very likely filibuster just about anyone Obama appoints to the bench. I hope they do, because they'll once again show the American public just how little respect they have for the president, let alone the office of the presidency.
All the more reason to make sure the Dems win the Senate.
Justice Ginsburg, who is 79, has stated that she wants to retire at 82 like Justice Louis Brandeis. She has always been a big fan of his. Besides being the first Jewish Supreme Court Justice (Ginsburg is Jewish), Brandeis is remembered as one of the greatest defenders of freedom of speech and right to privacy. However, if Romney wins, I expect she will try to hold off on retiring a bit longer.
If Romney wins, we might see the Supreme Court go even further with Citizens United. Instead of the farce of anonymous, unlimited donations to unaffiliated SuperPACs, they may just allow unlimited, anonymous donations directly to the campaigns. This whole law about not being permitted to coordinate with campaigns is ridiculous and unenforceable anyway.
Romney also wants to privatize foreign aid to other nations.
Unlike the democrats, who said they don't want a litmus test, but decided that every nominie from GWB had to answer how they would vote if roe v wade came up again and that was how they chose if they were going to allow them to go through and would then filibuster because they didn't have the votes to block them. There has not been a true conservative voted to the supreme court in a very long time. The conservatives we have now on the court are, at best, just slightly right of center while all liberal judges are true liberals.
I'm sure Alito and Roberts would disagree about whether they are true conservatives. They have been at the forefront of some of the most conservative decisions in recent history, including Citizen's United which pretty much destroyed most campaign finance laws. Yes, they did uphold Obamacare, but only through Robert's vote, and I strongly suspect he only switched sides so as to not make the Court look overly political--hence the incredibly twisted logic it took to support it, even when he could have easily grounded his ruling in the commerce clause of the Constitution.
Here's a thought - in 2000 if the Supreme Court were not stacked with his father's (conservative) choices to decide the election after his brother's appointed secretary of state "rearranged" the voter rolls in Florida perhaps George W. Bush would not have been elected - oh, wait, he wasn't, SCOTUS made the call. There would not been two unfunded wars - to pay back Halliburton - along with a huge tax cut for upper incomes that nearly destroyed the world economy. The housing bubble would have been manageable and millions would not have been laid off. I guess the conservatives are concerned that we will do to them what they did to us.
You're right Kathy..... speaking as a 69 year old former lifelong Republican, bush jr was the dumbest president in my memory. I sincerely hope we survive the damage that he, Cheney, Rumsfield and Greenspan did to this country! Four more years to see if we can start to patch up the horrific damage.
Bush would have won anyway. After all the votes were counted He won Florida. What war was ever funded? WWII was not funded, Lend Lease, (did they pay for the equipment before it was destroyed, No.) No war was ever funded at all. The same is true for Social Security, the government raided that fund almost as soon as it was started. It has been living on IOU's ever since. Tax Cuts, sound like the Government is giving back money, In fact it is that they are only taking less (but still a higher percentage then other tax payers have to pay. Why should some have to pay 36% and some 25% and some 10% and some pay nothing, while others get back more money then they paid? How crazy is that. If Pelosi and Reid didn't want to have banks lend money to poor people so that they could buy homes they couldn't afford, then tell the banks it is ok because we will have Freddy Mac, and Fanny Mae back the loans so you will not loose any money if they fail to pay you back, becacause the Taxpayer will cover Freddy and Fanny. Democrats are so used to screwing everything that many times they screw themselves. How anyone can belong to a party that makes a bad situation, then manages to make it even worse, then wants everyone to vote them back in so they can make it worse. A fool continues to do the same thing over and over expecting the outcome to change. After 4 years enough is enough.
"What we need to look at, is not just a judge's philosophy, but his willingness to adhere to that philosophy in the face of opposition by the U.S. Constitution." I'm pretty sure that's what he really meant.
Perchance to dream...
Upon the anticipated death of an aging Justice Scalia or the unanticipated but largely welcomed institutionalization of either Justice Thomas or Justice Alito within her Presidency, President Hillary Clinton sets another historic precedent by placing in nomination the name of a humbled and grateful former President Barack Hussein Obama as Justice on the Supreme Court, the first American to have served in each of the three branches of the federal government, effectively restoring a Center-Left majority which upholds and affirms Medicare-for-All, and while so doing publishes the most succinct majority opinion in the history of American jurisprudence, invoking the age-old populist axiom: "It's Constitutional, Bitches!"
Now that's funny. ICB
Actually that is pretty scary, Something Steven King, could write a book on.
you stinking liberals real want to destroy this country with the help of obame,and any body from msnbc are lying a— — holes
Wahhh....big crybaby. Go dry your tears and drool and wipe the snot off your face. Geez, what a hatefilled loser. good thing you only have one vote.
i disagree, Stuff it. I guess reality has finally set in that Rethuglicans aren't going to win anything,is that why you got your nuts in an uproar. I guess name calling is all you have left.
Simply to watch many people on the right and left go apoplectic I'd like to see Bill Clinton nominated to the SCOTUS.
Not that I really want him, but watching so many extremists on both side die from a sudden coronary from his nomination might calm the waters so we can get reasonable people in the senate.
LMAO. That should be at the very beginning of every Supreme Court opinion from now on.
“There’s a lot of sober thinking among conservatives that it is not just enough to appoint somebody who we know to have the right philosophy – you have to appoint somebody who has shown, either as a judge or perhaps in some other setting, that they will stick with that philosophy even when there’s political pressure to do otherwise.”
In other words, Republicans want justices to decide cases based on their political ideology - not the facts of the case and somehow that is not judicial activism...
Which court has had more cases overturned? It is the Liberial 9th curcuit court. They don't even go by the law, the make them up as they go, that is why they are overturned so often. You have the right idea but the wrong partys involved.
like justice roberts---- .Traitor. ......Obama care pronounced that they had the right to tell catholic churches who run hospitals to either give contraception or close it down. This is freedom of religeon. The dufus roberts decided he didnt' need to read the constitution but come up with his own liberalism. Thats what this is all a about. Who needs these guys that can't read or write. You don't make up things as you go along. Otherwise, you don't have freedom cause the paper can be considered as swhipe.
Sounds like yet another very good reason to vote for Obama.
a vote for obame is a vote to destroy this country as we know it ,he has already weakened it to the point that no one is affraid or respects the U.S. any more
I just want to know when the 23 million unemployed will get jobs?
When is Gas going to Stop Being above $4.00 a Gallon?
When will the other 50% of College Grads actually be able to find a Job?
When will my house no longer be under water?
When will the Federal Government Stop Spending more money than it Receives in Revenue?
Those are the things that will be affecting my children and the Poor not who will be the Next SCOTUS Appointee...
Never if Romney becomes President. He will double down on the policies who created your problems. And I must ask, you seem to be a Republican .... maybe you should take MItt's advice and take responsibility for yourself?
NO?
The Supreme Court does play a large part of how this country functions. The problem is for the last 80 years they have not done there duty, and have tried to make laws instead of deciding legality. Seperate but Equal, most of FDR's programs, and Obama's calling a penalty a tax, on someting that is not purchased. How do they come up with this stuff, it is like my neibhor buying a home and I have to pay is property taxes.
The gas thing is completely up to the speculators. If we got them out of the way the price would easily be slashed 30%.
Sorry but supply and demand (with some fear)control the price of gas. Allow for the full production of gas and the price would go down. If Obama keeps the supply limited then the price will stay up. Speculators drive up and drive down the prices overall, They bet on future ptential prices, that is all. Free up the supply and get rid of the taxes placed on it and the price will go down more then 30%, but then the Green energy companies would be out of business, and Obama wouldn't want that. That is why his policys try to keep the price of gas up, so that the green energy companies can have a chance to take over.
OK I was making a bit of a joke with Bill Clinton. In thinking about it if two seats were up I'd pick former Governor Jon Huntsman and former Senator from NJ Bill Bradley.
Both men have their respective political leanings...but neither would come up with a ruling left or right as stupid as Citizens United
x
Since this post is about the legal justice system, how is it that an Amish man who forceably cut the hair off a rival is charged with assault and might do time, while Romey does the same thing to an innocent classmate and walks away scott free? Is it possible to make a citizen's arrrest?
Even the kid in question did not recall the event. Romney teased a kid in 1963 while in grade school. omg!!!
First, it was grade school.
Second, the statue of limitations for teasing a kid is grade school has to be less than 50 years.
Third, he was a juvenile, a kid and much like a typical democrat, in 1963 Romney was immature and should not be held responsible for his actions.
FOURTH, unlike a typical democrat, Romney grew up and became a man.
Democrats,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,party of the pathetic.
Republicans,,,,,,,, Party of it's our way and no other way, republicans=losers in 2012
Communist judges in the former USSr gladly decided the law based on party doctrine, communist judges in America will gladly decide the law based on party doctrine without considering the Constitution or the fact we live in America.
Party functionaries that have already been appointed as judges are currently deciding cases of all types based on DNC/Communist party doctrine without regard to the actual laws of our nation.
Re-electing Obama will certainly make it worse.
Wow....you skipped right over "socialist" and went right to "communist."
Beck and Limbaugh would be proud of you little soldier.
Paid.....You will, no doubt, provide us with documented evidence of the claim you make, right? I should hope so. To not do so would make you a liar.
Your opinion about "communist judges" describes, precisely, what the Republican party has done with their appointees. Would you care to elaborate on that? Please, also, provide your list of "communist" judges in America.
I could cite a hundred instances where a political appointee judge ruled according to party dogma and without regard to actual law, you would not read a single one.
One of my favorite interviews was Rachel Madcow and a female running for the Wisconsin Supreme Court. She implied over and over with a snicker, that if "we elect this woman, Scott Walker's policies will certainly be overturned. Not once in the entire segment, did this woman correct her and suggest she would rule according to precedent and law.
There are countless tales of famlies who had their lives ruined by the EPA or IRS refusing to abide court rulings and continuing their attacks on people rights, you won't read them either.
Running afoul of a party functionary has ruined countless lives, you would never know that because I did not cite it for you. Of course, the party is always right, they care about the poor, down- trodden and weak. That is why the democrats always carry the counties with the highest criem rates and most murders.
For a laugh, overlay the county map of places that voted for Obama and counties with the highest murder rates. They are one in the same, hence Chicago votes 95% democrat.
It would be easier to convince the Pope there was no God, that to get a democrat to reason or think for him/herself. Read your party history sometime, you will be appalled. Same thing would happen if you did a little research on Obama and his beliefs.
Google sometime.........
When i look at president Obama and our government,i think of the nazis and national socialism.This time the jews are arabs and folks in the middle east.Nice secret police set up we have,Homeland security,NDAA and expanded executive powers. I dont like Obamas thinking.He is Bush on steroids.
Ron Paul was the right choice,a freedom candidate who was anti war and willing to attack the budget.
hey teathugs, american taliban, neocons, and good old fashion RWNJs:
before you worry about packing the SCOTUS with mirror images of yourself maybe you should learn how to win a presidential election
i really hope with a Obama re-election it insures he gets to replace Scalia, sex-offender Thomas, and Kennedy
that would be a riot!
Here is an idea that would make for side splitting laughter,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,watching you try to take an IQ test.
Kennedy would be a good guy to keep on the court. He's the only conservative who gives a crap about civil rights.
Kennedy said Obamacare was a tax. It is the first time you have to pay a tax on something you don't use. The court is liberial enough already. If this continues I think we will have to place term limits on the justices.
I believe you use medical insurance.