SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Peter Dierks who wrote (206620)10/15/2004 9:24:16 AM
From: i-node  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 1572859
 
Peter

The neoliberal re-interpretation of the Constitution is a problem.

This is the heart-and-soul of what is going on with the dems on the Judiciary Committeee. It ought to be a crime, because they KNOW that what they're doing is destructive to the Constitution, yet they continue to pursue it.

The problem is that the Constitution was never intended to be interpreted with a liberal bent. Today, there is a persistent, year after year push toward the extremes of the underlying meanings of Constitutional provisions. Over time, it totally erodes the document.

What has transpired in the last 4 years in the Judiciary Committee is so obviously wrong and destructive that I'm amazed that even the liberals are so tolerant of it. But the end justifies the means. As usual.



To: Peter Dierks who wrote (206620)10/15/2004 10:55:59 AM
From: SilentZ  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1572859
 
>Face it. Democrats are trying to ensure that Bush cannot make Appellate Court appointments.

Didn't the Democrats approve all but four of Bush's appointments? They have a better record on that than the Republicans did under Clinton, AFAIK.

Bush and his cronies selected the most conservative minorities they could find specifically so people like you could make bogus charges of racist and anti-Catholicism.

>Judges who legislate from the branch are not reinterpretting the Constitution, they are violating it.

Yes. I get it. When a conservative judge interprets the Constitution, they're making a sound judgement. When a liberal judge does the same, they're "legislating from the bench." Such crap.

-Z



To: Peter Dierks who wrote (206620)10/15/2004 1:06:37 PM
From: tejek  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1572859
 
The claim against Janice Rogers Brown is that she is conservative, and includes her opinions in her rulings. On those grounds the entire ninth circus court is unqualified. On the left coast anyone who is not off the scale left is conservative. That is a mortal sin. She was rated well by the national bar.

No the claim is that she shows her politics, not her conservatism, in her rulings. There's a difference.


HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News