New Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito

Dtop

No I understood that part, but again I cannot agree. When you have 7 Republican nominated justices vs. 2 Democrat nominated justices (both by Clinton in the mid 90's). I simple cannot accept the court as liberal. Even to classify both Souter and Kennedy as moderates, doesnt shift it left enough. Rehnquest was not a far right judge but that doesnt make him a liberal. My position still remains Rehnquest court as center-right.

I absolutely agree that the court should be Bi-Partisan and outside politics. But when you see Supreme Court justices at fancy dinner parties given by well known Democrats or going duck hunting with a certain conservative Republican Vice Presidents I find it very hard to believe that they are just talking about the weather. I think politics has been seeping through the court for some time now. Look at Marbury vs Madison that was most definatlly court politics and thats in 1803.

Thats just my opinion, I could be wrong.

I need to ask you about something else off topic, can you please check your PM...
 
I will grant you that you can't expect to remove the politics from politicians. The justices are human and didn't get to where they are by being apolitical. I do think that the court should be as non-partisan as possible though. I think most Americans would prefer a balanced court. I will be interesting to see this drama unfold.
 
Italian Guy said:
That's right, the Supreme Court has long been far from being conservative. Everybody knows that. It's the first time now that the trend is reversing.

One thing the both ammuses and annoys me is that in the Western media (primarily USA, Canada, UK, Australia), left-wing / liberal commentators, experts, legal professionals, organisations, and celebrities are named and quoted without any pre-fix because they're regarded by the aforementioned media as "normal," "moderate," "middle-of-the-road." Whereas their right-wing / conservative counter-parts are nearly always prefixed as "right-wing," "arch" or "neo conservative." It seems biased and unfair, and I would add to Italian Guy's quote that it seems OK to have a legislature, executive or judiciary that leans left but God forbid if it ever leans right - yet courts and judges are there to umpire disputes and interpretations of the enacted law not to make laws or stretch them or interpret them way beyond their obvious and original wording. The commentator and legislator who is the most hypocritical and biased in such matters is Senator Ted Kennedy who couldn't hold a candle to his great and older brother
 
What do you mean Padre? Teddy Kennedy a hypocrite ;)

Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-MA): "You [Alito] Have Obviously Had A Very Distinguished Record, And I Certainly Commend You For Long Service In The Public Interest. I Think It Is A Very Commendable Career And I Am Sure You Will Have A Successful One As A Judge." (Sen. Ted Kennedy, Committee On The Judiciary, U.S. Senate, Hearing, 4/5/90)

Now, Sen. Kennedy Says Alito Has "Troubling Record":

Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-MA): "Rather Than Selecting A Nominee For The Good Of The Nation And The Court, President Bush Has Picked A Nominee Whom He Hopes Will Stop The Massive Hemorrhaging Of Support On His Right Wing. This Is A Nomination Based On Weakness, Not On Strength." (Sen. Ted Kennedy, "Kennedy Statement On Nomination Of Judge Samuel Alito To Supreme Court," Press Release, 10/31/05)

Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-MA): "[The President] Put Forth A Nominee With A Troubling Record On The Rights And Freedoms Important To America's Families." (Sen. Ted Kennedy, "Kennedy Statement On Nomination Of Judge Samuel Alito To Supreme Court," Press Release, 10/31/05)
 
DTop and Padre

I actually agree with Kennedy on many issues but he and his clan is so decandent (I speak from personal experiance, the whole family is the same) its almost impossible to defend him. I dont like Bush for being a right wing extremist, Kennedy is Bush 's polar opposite, and I dont like him for the same reason. There are better liberal Senetors than Kennedy, Russ Feingold of Wisconsin for example.

Italian guy

I notice you bring up the flip-flop issue alot. Not to get too far off topic, but you should know thats a sword that cuts equally both ways. Bush for example is pretty bad himself.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/09/28/politics/main646142.shtml
 
mmarsh said:
I speak from personal experiance
I thought I saw you in Hyannisport at the compound. You know, you really didn't have to drink that much :lol:
I lived in Massachusetts and I never voted for Ted even when he ran unopposed, which was quite often.
 
mmarsh said:
Italian Guy I notice you bring up the flip-flop issue alot. Not to get too far off topic, but you should know thats a sword that cuts equally both ways. Bush for example is pretty bad himself. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/09/28/politics/main646142.shtml

I know, you had already shown that to me. Thank you. Only problem is that Bush didn't say any of those on the TV debates, a few hours before elections, like Kerry did ("Voted for it before I voted against"), and people tend to vote for the smarter guy ;)
That being said, I don't think the list is accurate. Point number two, for example, doesn't prove anything. Either does the second-last point, but I'm afraid this is going :eek:fftopic:
And anyways I was taught that you point your finger at the others' flaws when you can't defend your side. Doesn't mean you're innocent if I'm guilty too.
 
Back
Top