Roberts Takes Step in Restoring Court's Image in Political Science Forum

RSS
Email

0 Points

Roberts Takes Step in Restoring Court's Image

Author	Comment
buckyballsandpucks		#41	[url]	[-]
Posts: 1671 June 29, 2012 12:03 PM	Remove this ad "What an OPPORTUNITY for John Roberts with this opinion. It reminds me of Coach Wooden and his truly EPOCHAL teaching from his Pyramid of Success... ." [Eighteen minute gap] "And Jerry and the other boys played SUBLIMELY for the remainder of the evening." Edited 1 time by buckyballsandpucks June 29, 2012 12:08 PM.
Interact My Recent Posts	Reply Quote
Bucky4077		#42	[url]	[-]
Posts: 2418 June 29, 2012 12:58 PM	mcguda wrote: It's time to rent Yankee Stadium and invite all the pundits and sages so they can collectively give us the full benefit of "Here's What it All Means" followed by "The Real Justice Roberts: An Analysis". What's ironic is that these learned observers, virtually all of whom have never written a case opinion in their lives, breezily take the opinion apart and, depending on their own bias, point out its flaws and faulty reasoning. Then it's "Here's what Justice Roberts was trying to accomplish politically." Oh, for Chrissake, spare me. It's just possible he looked at the AHCA and the states' challenge to it, and then carefully determined what he believed to be the applicable law. That's his job. Of course, "He is looking to his own place in history". Jesus. I'd rather listen to Bill Walton. Sometimes cynicism is refreshing. Your post is an example. "The teacher are paying for it. The state budget is balanced. Everything is great now." Blab of Bacon 7/20/11
Interact My Recent Posts	Reply Quote
ThisCharmingFan		#43	[url]	[-]
Posts: 13702 June 29, 2012 1:04 PM The disputatious one	badgering wrote: PBRmeASAP wrote: I'm sure Roberts made the decision to get invited to some posh parties. You sound like a sore loser to me. Party invitations aren't the point. Whether I am a sore loser isn't the point. What I sound like isn't the point. Other than that, the observation is dead on. Sure it is. Just like I know you will support a liberal divining the mindset of conservatives. Your observation is so full of vapid assumptions that I'm actually feeling badly for you.
Interact My Recent Posts	Reply Quote
dewey35		#44	[url]	[-]
Posts: 1500 June 29, 2012 1:10 PM	The mention of the four older chief justices got me to thinking how much fun a Supreme Court appointment would be to watch in this political climate. Is the Senate approval process filibuster proof ? Does it need a 51-49 to pass or 60-40?
Interact My Recent Posts	Reply Quote
badgering		#45	[url]	[-]
Posts: 4471 June 29, 2012 1:38 PM "Crowds. Queing. Waiting. Bad weather. Many liberals, few conservatives and virtually no libertarians. These conditions are tolerable only at a Buckyville tailgate." - badgering on the inauguration events	ThisCharmingFan wrote: badgering wrote: PBRmeASAP wrote: I'm sure Roberts made the decision to get invited to some posh parties. You sound like a sore loser to me. Party invitations aren't the point. Whether I am a sore loser isn't the point. What I sound like isn't the point. Other than that, the observation is dead on. Sure it is. Just like I know you will support a liberal divining the mindset of conservatives. Your observation is so full of vapid assumptions that I'm actually feeling badly for you. What is "it?" You don't know me at all. Feel bad for me? Good post, otherwise.
Interact My Recent Posts	Reply Quote
buckyballsandpucks		#46	[url]	[-]
Posts: 1671 June 29, 2012 2:03 PM	Remove this ad dewey- Filibustering a Supreme Court nomination has generally not been considered cricket, although a filibuster might (or might not) have taken place concerning the Abe Fortas nomination in 1968. Keep in mind, however, that what's considered cricket changes over time. It wasn't so long ago that the notion that nearly every legislative proposal would have to able to prevail on a cloture vote would have been thought to be absurd. Edited 1 time by buckyballsandpucks June 29, 2012 3:04 PM.
Interact My Recent Posts	Reply Quote
ThisCharmingFan		#47	[url]	[-]
Posts: 13702 June 29, 2012 2:05 PM The disputatious one	badgering wrote: ThisCharmingFan wrote: badgering wrote: PBRmeASAP wrote: I'm sure Roberts made the decision to get invited to some posh parties. You sound like a sore loser to me. Party invitations aren't the point. Whether I am a sore loser isn't the point. What I sound like isn't the point. Other than that, the observation is dead on. Sure it is. Just like I know you will support a liberal divining the mindset of conservatives. Your observation is so full of vapid assumptions that I'm actually feeling badly for you. What is "it?" You don't know me at all. Feel bad for me? Good post, otherwise. Observation. You couldn't be more disengenous if you tried. Like i said, i know you will have our backs when we start to divine the mindset of conservatives. I look forward to that. P.S. I know it has been a tough 7 days for you. First, Obama destroyed the constitution then he instituted socialism. Now the polls have him leading in swing states.
Interact My Recent Posts	Reply Quote
badgering		#48	[url]	[-]
Posts: 4471 June 29, 2012 2:55 PM "Crowds. Queing. Waiting. Bad weather. Many liberals, few conservatives and virtually no libertarians. These conditions are tolerable only at a Buckyville tailgate." - badgering on the inauguration events	ThisCharmingFan wrote: badgering wrote: ThisCharmingFan wrote: badgering wrote: PBRmeASAP wrote: I'm sure Roberts made the decision to get invited to some posh parties. You sound like a sore loser to me. Party invitations aren't the point. Whether I am a sore loser isn't the point. What I sound like isn't the point. Other than that, the observation is dead on. Sure it is. Just like I know you will support a liberal divining the mindset of conservatives. Your observation is so full of vapid assumptions that I'm actually feeling badly for you. What is "it?" You don't know me at all. Feel bad for me? Good post, otherwise. Observation. You couldn't be more disengenous if you tried. Like i said, i know you will have our backs when we start to divine the mindset of conservatives. I look forward to that. P.S. I know it has been a tough 7 days for you. First, Obama destroyed the constitution then he instituted socialism. Now the polls have him leading in swing states. Should I be insulted more by your claim that I'm disingenuous or that I'm not trying? Don't answer because I'm insulted by neither. But there you go again, "knowing" something I will do in the future. Clairvoyance abounds! The last seven days have been rather pleasant - except for the John Roberts conundrum which is correctable at the polls, where it should be. That's "polls" as in the voting variety.
Interact My Recent Posts	Reply Quote
ThisCharmingFan		#49	[url]	[-]
Posts: 13702 June 29, 2012 3:40 PM The disputatious one	badgering wrote: ThisCharmingFan wrote: badgering wrote: ThisCharmingFan wrote: badgering wrote: PBRmeASAP wrote: I'm sure Roberts made the decision to get invited to some posh parties. You sound like a sore loser to me. Party invitations aren't the point. Whether I am a sore loser isn't the point. What I sound like isn't the point. Other than that, the observation is dead on. Sure it is. Just like I know you will support a liberal divining the mindset of conservatives. Your observation is so full of vapid assumptions that I'm actually feeling badly for you. What is "it?" You don't know me at all. Feel bad for me? Good post, otherwise. Observation. You couldn't be more disengenous if you tried. Like i said, i know you will have our backs when we start to divine the mindset of conservatives. I look forward to that. P.S. I know it has been a tough 7 days for you. First, Obama destroyed the constitution then he instituted socialism. Now the polls have him leading in swing states. Should I be insulted more by your claim that I'm disingenuous or that I'm not trying? Don't answer because I'm insulted by neither. But there you go again, "knowing" something I will do in the future. Clairvoyance abounds! The last seven days have been rather pleasant - except for the John Roberts conundrum which is correctable at the polls, where it should be. That's "polls" as in the voting variety. Then irony of you noting my ability to divine what you will do (did no such thing) while at the same time doing so yourself is high comedy.
Interact My Recent Posts	Reply Quote
badgerjon66		#50	[url]	[-]
Posts: 3500 July 1, 2012 8:01 AM	McCuda, above: "It's just possible he looked at the AHCA and the states' challenge to it, and then carefully determined what he believed to be the applicable law. That's his job." Good point. Sometimes thing are just what they look like, and elaborate attempts at complex interpretation are just silly. Speaking of cynicism, it's amusing that people who are outraged and make accusations of political corruption, etc. when a 5-4 decision goes against their desires can be absolutely delighted with the correctness and fairness of a 5-4 decision that goes their way. In one case the dissenters may be reading the law and the Constitution perfectly, and in the other they are to be ignored. (as is the fact that one of the 5 arguably should have recused) Many of these people are in the press.
Interact My Recent Posts	Reply Quote
TheMonsignor		#51	[url]	[-]
Posts: 7114 July 1, 2012 2:14 PM Phil King "200 lbs, dripping wet"	mcguda wrote: It's time to rent Yankee Stadium and invite all the pundits and sages so they can collectively give us the full benefit of "Here's What it All Means" followed by "The Real Justice Roberts: An Analysis". What's ironic is that these learned observers, virtually all of whom have never written a case opinion in their lives, breezily take the opinion apart and, depending on their own bias, point out its flaws and faulty reasoning. Then it's "Here's what Justice Roberts was trying to accomplish politically." Oh, for Chrissake, spare me. It's just possible he looked at the AHCA and the states' challenge to it, and then carefully determined what he believed to be the applicable law. That's his job. Of course, "He is looking to his own place in history". Jesus. I'd rather listen to Bill Walton. Well, mcg, the two aren't mutually exclusive. It is possible he really did read the act that way and it is possible he really wanted the court to show some more restraint. Bless the Badgers.
Interact My Recent Posts	Reply Quote
mcguda		#52	[url]	[-]
Posts: 7706 July 1, 2012 6:55 PM C.O.F. elderly gangbanger	Remove this ad TheMonsignor wrote: mcguda wrote: It's time to rent Yankee Stadium and invite all the pundits and sages so they can collectively give us the full benefit of "Here's What it All Means" followed by "The Real Justice Roberts: An Analysis". What's ironic is that these learned observers, virtually all of whom have never written a case opinion in their lives, breezily take the opinion apart and, depending on their own bias, point out its flaws and faulty reasoning. Then it's "Here's what Justice Roberts was trying to accomplish politically." Oh, for Chrissake, spare me. It's just possible he looked at the AHCA and the states' challenge to it, and then carefully determined what he believed to be the applicable law. That's his job. Of course, "He is looking to his own place in history". Jesus. I'd rather listen to Bill Walton. Well, mcg, the two aren't mutually exclusive. It is possible he really did read the act that way and it is possible he really wanted the court to show some more restraint. Anything's possible, but we've only the record to go on, as they say. I think we start by presuming that a judge writes what he means; anything else is purely an assumption. Commentators flyspeck the language. "Aha! Here he reveals his true message." Of course, the "message" is in the eye of the beholder. Until Roberts gives an interview in which he admits he was trying to "infuse the Court with new restraint" or "resurrect the credibility we lost in Citizens United" or "________________________(pick your own flavor)", maybe we just take him at his word. When we move on to discuss the "long-term (or grave) consequences" of the holding, at least then we're in admittedly speculative territory.
Interact My Recent Posts	Reply Quote

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>

Yuku free message boards

Roberts Takes Step in Restoring Court's Image