As a life-long liberal (much longer than you've been alive), I am as concerned about liberals like you as I am about extreme right-wingers.
You profess to know so much, but don't want to hear, read into, or interpret anything beyond what you read in the press. If it supports your view, it's "right" (as koan used the term). If it doesn't, it is "wrong." You need to be right. Okay. You win. I'll say that, but never acknowledge that you have a legal issue right -- because you don't and haven't in the time I've skimmed your posts.
The most dangerous, right or left, are those who don't know what they don't know and assemble everything they see, read, or hear in support of their view. They learn nothing, as a consequence. Worse still, some find little chat boards and post non-stop trying to impress themselves with how impressive they realize they are not.
A great example is your cavalier use of a turn of phrase, "get rid of judicial review." I know what judicial review is and means in all of its parameters and permutations. I know where it came from, and don't need your faux effort at a history lesson. It's obvious you don't have any clue what it means, and don't really care to know or what the consequences might be if we did just what you suggest. It's an idiotic statement.
Now, go ahead and lash out at me again claiming I am running and hiding or whatever you wish to say. I attempted to correct a small fraction of your nonsensical legal sophistry. That obviously made you mad, and I understand that.
Take care, and do yourself a favor and actually go study law, the constitution, and judicial/legal process. Reading what you read is not going to help you develop the sense of it you mistakenly believe you have. |
