How It's Going To Be

[they call me MR. GRUMPY god damn it!]

conservatives appointed to the court will respect the constitution and understand the limits of judicial purview.  ruth bader ginsberg are you kidding me!!

[Vermouth]

Harriet Myers ... what was that all about? Was that even a serious nomination?

[they call me MR. GRUMPY god damn it!]

Harriet Myers ... what was that all about? Was that even a serious nomination?

it was a pocket nomination.  an attempt by bush to place someone on the court with no record to attack and whom bush was sure would follow scalia's lead.  after all the furor died he ended up appointing roberts and alito, to well qualified, conservative jurists.

[Peter1469]

Pat Buchanan said it most recently...not the first or the last

The mistake the democrats are making is thinking that the dissatisfaction with current regime is an endorsement of their (misguided) practices. if and when they assume power, they will assume a mandate -- where non exists -- and promptly continue to fuck things up, be corrupt, and basically be no better than republicans (the last bit is my own interpretation).

i guess things are going to have to get worse before they get better...only when we have 3rd parties or at the least politicians accountable for their own actions  will america continue to chart new heights. in the meantime i guess we've got to settle for the status quo

This is exactly correct.  It is why I have left the Republican Party and will not support the current Republican candidate.  It is much better to have bad policies blamed on the Democrats than the Republicans.  Otherwise we will never return to a limited federal republic. 

can this nation recover from the long term ramifications of a supreme court stacked by bo or mrs bill?

Can this nation survive administrations from either party spending money faster than we can print it?

[Vermouth]

it was a pocket nomination.  an attempt by bush to place someone on the court with no record to attack and whom bush was sure would follow scalia's lead.  after all the furor died he ended up appointing roberts and alito, to well qualified, conservative jurists.

It was irresponsible to nominate someone unqualified. To me, it indicated that Bush doesn't respect our system of government. This is a lifetime appointment. Once there, who know if she'd follow Scalia's lead. Look at how the current justices have evolved over time.

[they call me MR. GRUMPY god damn it!]

Pat Buchanan said it most recently...not the first or the last

The mistake the democrats are making is thinking that the dissatisfaction with current regime is an endorsement of their (misguided) practices. if and when they assume power, they will assume a mandate -- where non exists -- and promptly continue to fuck things up, be corrupt, and basically be no better than republicans (the last bit is my own interpretation).

i guess things are going to have to get worse before they get better...only when we have 3rd parties or at the least politicians accountable for their own actions  will america continue to chart new heights. in the meantime i guess we've got to settle for the status quo

This is exactly correct.  It is why I have left the Republican Party and will not support the current Republican candidate.  It is much better to have bad policies blamed on the Democrats than the Republicans.  Otherwise we will never return to a limited federal republic. 

can this nation recover from the long term ramifications of a supreme court stacked by bo or mrs bill?

Can this nation survive administrations from either party spending money faster than we can print it?

this is not a discussion re fiscal responsibility, rather re the impact of scotus.  a yes or no question?!?

[gorknoids]

it was a pocket nomination.  an attempt by bush to place someone on the court with no record to attack and whom bush was sure would follow scalia's lead.  after all the furor died he ended up appointing roberts and alito, to well qualified, conservative jurists.

. To me, it indicated that Bush doesn't respect our system of government. This is a lifetime appointment. Once there, who know if she'd follow Scalia's lead. Look at how the current justices have evolved over time.

     
It was irresponsible to nominate someone unqualified
We'll all be saying that as soon as the dems decide whether Hitlary or Nobama runs against McCain.

[Vermouth]

It was irresponsible to nominate someone unqualified
We'll all be saying that as soon as the dems decide whether Hitlary or Nobama runs against McCain.

Why? Everybody gets to vote and it's for a limited term.

[they call me MR. GRUMPY god damn it!]

It was irresponsible to nominate someone unqualified
We'll all be saying that as soon as the dems decide whether Hitlary or Nobama runs against McCain.

Why? Everybody gets to vote and it's for a limited term.

yeah gee wow wee why is it irresponsible to nominate someone unqualified for president

[Peter1469]

Can this nation survive administrations from either party spending money faster than we can print it?
[/quote]

this is not a discussion re fiscal responsibility, rather re the impact of scotus.  a yes or no question?!?
[/quote]

It doesn’t matter one bit who is on the Supreme Court if administrations from both parties spend us into oblivion. 

[Vermouth]

It was irresponsible to nominate someone unqualified
We'll all be saying that as soon as the dems decide whether Hitlary or Nobama runs against McCain.

Why? Everybody gets to vote and it's for a limited term.

yeah gee wow wee why is it irresponsible to nominate someone unqualified for president

You don't trust the voters, do you?

[they call me MR. GRUMPY god damn it!]

i have neither trust or respect for the voters and yes the conformation of scotus is not just important but other than war time powers it has over time become the most important function of the executive.