Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 : Sioux Nation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: James Calladine who wrote (26620)	7/6/2005 5:46:17 PM
From: Sawdusty	Respond to of 362360

IMO you're absolutely correct on this issue James.

To: James Calladine who wrote (26620)	7/6/2005 6:16:53 PM
From: techguerrilla	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 362360

No, I'm not OK with Gonzalez ... --cutting losses-- ... eom

To: James Calladine who wrote (26620)	7/6/2005 6:29:09 PM
From: SiouxPal	Respond to of 362360

I've always been with you. This time too.:•)

To: James Calladine who wrote (26620)	7/6/2005 8:53:43 PM
From: manalagi	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 362360

I think Gonzales is a moderate. Once he is his own man, he might show his true color. Supreme Court appointments is always a gamble, you never knew how he/she will turns out. Just ask Eisenhower who said "his biggest mistake", or ask Bush I about Souter. There are other extremists that Bush can appoint like Ashcroft, or take Bolton away from the UN and appoint him to the highest court (ooops, Bolton is not qualified).

To: James Calladine who wrote (26620)	7/6/2005 10:45:48 PM
From: Wharf Rat	Respond to of 362360

Qualified and eligible; he meets whatever the requirements are. Unfortunately, endorsing torture and killing the Geneva Convention are not Constitutional restrictions for him. Gotta hope there are enuf decent R's in the Senate to block him.

To: James Calladine who wrote (26620)	7/7/2005 9:03:15 AM
From: cirrus	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 362360

Gonzalez was arguing a case for his client. Lawyers do that every day. It doesn't mean he would follow that line of reasoning as a judge. And lets remember... after 9/11 just about everyone in America would have been in favor of far more torture than the Gonzalez guidelines allowed if such torture prevented further terror attacks. I'm not arguing in favor of torture, but there is a difference between mixing up someone's sleep routine and applying electrical prods to their privates. If it weren't for the Gonzalez guidelines what would the rules be? Defense attorneys argue for clients they know to be guilty but act from a different perspective when they become judges. That's the way the system works. It's better to look at Gonzalez's rulings from the bench to get insight to his thinking. Some of those rulings have ticked off the right wing, so he's obviously not in their pocket. Your assumption that Gonzalez will be a mouthpiece for Bush/Cheney is just that, an assumption... he might well happen... but I can think of a number of other far worse candidates who are guaranteed to be mouthpieces for the religious right. You folks are OK with the architect of torture policies on the Supreme Court........?