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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Srexley who wrote (733299)	3/21/2006 12:37:27 PM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

Ah, I see what you are saying.... I think you are HALF right then. When I posted this: [...Some conservatives are still fuming over the federal courts' refusal to intervene in the Terri Schiavo case last year.] Guess they are looking for a more activist court. I was CLEARLY just making a comment about the views expressed in the article you posted. OBVIOUSLY, I was referring to the 'some conservatives' who are 'still fuming' that was mentioned in the article. (I don't think there can be any confusion about that. It seems perfectly clear what I was referring to, Scott.) But when I continued on and said this: When you want to court to step up, invent some authority and justification for an intervention, and then DO SOMETHING for you... it's all peaches and cream, eh? But when they invent some authority to justify a court intervention that you DON'T AGREE WITH... it's all 'activist court this' and 'damned activist court that'. I fell into the mistake of assuming (without clear evidence) that YOU agreed with the views that were expressed in the article you posted. For that I appologize, you were right in pointing out my mistake. >>> Just for the record, though... DO YOU agree with the call (by those unnamed 'some conservatives') for the Supreme Court to have intervened in the Schiavo case? (Because, if you do, then I believe my comment would be appropriate: in some cases you would want the Court to be 'more activist'....) So... do you?