Yes and praying it will be McCain.

MURPHY

We're praying TWICE as hard that he ISN'T elected.

MURPH

You're gonna have to sell your soul to the voice George W Bush heard that told him to invade Iraq.

Even then, it didn't work out so well for Little George did it?

Enough reason in itself not to vote for 0bama.

Now if only there was a real conservative running for Prez.

Would anybody seriously want a 7 Justice Conservative majority in the SC? My God, we had a dominant GOP controlled Congress and WH for six years, and they put the country in the worst shape it has been in in my lifetime. Be careful rightwingers, you may just get what you are asking for, and it will result in the destruction of what is left of America.

Obama could appoint his buddies Rev. Wright and William Ayers to the Supreme Court.

Jesse Jackson blew any chance the had.

Sharpton is praying he can delay his trial to next year.

Obama is wearing his Jesse Jackson Protector Underwear..

Jessee Jacksons comments were a gift to Obama.

All of the right-wing KKK crowd will now begin to wonder why the 'darky' they despise most (Jackson) is upset with Obama.

Perhaps Obama isn't going to enslave the white race after all.

"Perhaps Obama isn't going to enslave the white race after all."

No just all Americans regardless of race.

Would anybody seriously want a 7 Justice Conservative majority in the SC?

Well, yes. We almost lost the second amendment by one vote. I don't want to see that happen again.

Would anybody seriously want a 7 Justice Conservative majority in the SC? My God, we had a dominant GOP controlled ...

Posted by moder8 at 2008-07-13 08:46 PM | Reply

And moder8 makes classic lefty mistake No. 327: There is a distinct difference between Conservatives and Republicans.

And as Red says, the current balance is too close to rescinding the Bill of Rights. Once Osama appoints Hillary! to the bench she'll be the doctator she's always lusted for, and you can kiss all your freedoms goodbye.

But at least she'd 'do it for the children'

dictator, that is

Attaboy Verm!

Any liberal justice who can't see the 2nd ammendment as a right for Americans to own guns doesn't belong on the SC.

I just wish there was a way to get those who voted against gun ownership off the SC.

These are the same ones who voted for eminent domain.

....The Supreme Court ruled yesterday that local governments may force property owners to sell out and make way for private economic development when officials decide it would benefit the public, even if the property is not blighted and the new project's success is not guaranteed.....

God forbid if there ever is a majority of liberal justices on the bench.

rwd

Gee, we had a liberal SCOTUS for decades and you still have yer gun aintcha Elwood?

Its ok AU i hope they steal your house and put up a meth clinic.

rwd

RWD

Wow, what an idiotic statement

At least you're good for a chuckle

Obama could appoint his buddies Rev. Wright and William Ayers to the Supreme Court.

Posted by fwthom

Damn..... You beat me to it.

Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2008-07-13 11:02 PM | Reply |

Only a fool would laugh at that.

Its very real.

rwd

RON JEREMY CAN BE A GOOD JUSTICE....

I thought only lawyers could be appointed to the SCOTUS. Am I wrong?

RWD

Like I said, you still have yer guns aintcha Elwood?

AU, geez dude. Why do you tap the glass? Leave the fish alone.

MODER8

I wanna remind him there's bigger fish....

And that little thing Jim Beam likes to say:

FACT!

Attaboy Verm!

Posted by Jomama at 2008-07-13 10:28 PM | Reply

Thanks for your support.

I'm just glad to see you're finally coming around. I've been telling you for years that you're wrong, and why you're wrong, so it sounds like you may actually beginning to think.

Keep striving for clear thinking, JoMa, and one day you too could be a Conservative.

God forbid if there ever is a majority of liberal justices on the bench. - rwd

If there was a God with the morality we are taught to associate with Jesus Christ, he would make damn sure there WAS a majority of liberal justices on the bench.

We now have a solid Fascist Four who'll never go on the side of justice and Anthony Kennedy the swing vote that REALLY runs the country. Yes. not only two of the court's only mildly conservative centrists are 88 and 75, but three of the Fascist Four (Thomas, Roberts, Alito) are youngest. If we don't elect O'Bama (we will!) we can surely kill this old democracy goodbye.

A few of the most rigid righties, those with jellied testosterone in their systems, keep pushing the quaint fiction that the Second Amendment guarantees private gun ownership. It has long been established that the Second guarantees state rights to run militias. I suppose a thousand gun deaths a year is a small enough price, like a thousand military deaths in Iraq ... herm

Kill? Maybe. I meant kiss. You knew that. herm

Herm, the SCOTUS disagrees with you. As of a couple of weeks ago the right to bear arms is indeed separate from the right of States to maintain militias. It is now the official interpretation of the US Constitution.

As I read it, Mod, the court reversed a DC law but left plenty of room for future justices to save a thousand American lives each year. It takes only one people-oriented appointee.

Actually, I cannot CATEGORICALLY oppose all private gun ownership. I know a 30-year-old female college student, a disabled navy vet, who lives alone in a bad part of town. I'd honor her right to self defense. But i think we need to set up some extremely rigid controls. herm

Let's take a trip down memory lane. Remember all the whining and crying that the conservatives did when Junior's judicial appointees were not immediately approved by the Dems?
Let's hope that President Obama's appointees get approved with no filibustering.

Actually, I cannot CATEGORICALLY oppose all private gun ownership. I know a 30-year-old female college student, a disabled navy vet, who lives alone in a bad part of town. I'd honor her right to self defense. But i think we need to set up some extremely rigid controls. herm

Ah.

Or she could move the fuck out of the bad part of town so she wouldn't need to have a weapon. C'mon herm, your hypocrisy is showing. Either strict gun control for everyone or no one. Unless you like the idea of segregating people into comfortable little groups to make them easier to manage.

Take your pills, old man. Your dementia is taking control.

"It has long been established that the Second guarantees state rights to run militias."
--HERM

Senility takes hold.

**** Obama could appoint his buddies Rev. Wright and William Ayers to the Supreme Court.
Posted by fwthom ****

......sorta like Harriet Myers, except the dick isn't hanging between her eyes.........

Since the next president is going to be a conservative republican or a conservative democrat, what type of replacement do you think we're going to get?

bait and switch wins again, my friends.

"or a conservative democrat"

What about Barack Obama is "conservative" as far as democrats go?

Darth Vader Ginsburg? She/He? caught with battery operated self pleasuring device at work.Term Limits on these people.

What about Barack Obama is "conservative" as far as democrats go?

Posted by JOE

LOL... no, really, LMGDAO.

1) FISA

2) relaxing separation of church and state..

3) expanding the military.

Andy Dufresne: How can you be so obtuse?
Warden Samuel Norton: What? What did you call me?
Andy Dufresne: Obtuse? Is it deliberate?

Posted by Hagbard_Celine at 2008-07-14 09:24 AM

And how much do you want to bet that troops will still be in Iraq by the end of his first term?

And how much do you want to bet that troops will still be in Iraq by the end of his first term?

Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE

I know there will be troops there... as much as 60,000 of them plus 100,000 contractors.

Obama could appoint his buddies Rev. Wright and William Ayers to the Supreme Court.

Posted by fwthom

It would be worth it just to watch you fuckheads blow your tops.

As I read it, Mod, the court reversed a DC law but left plenty of room for future justices to save a thousand American lives each year.

Your crazy to think that any court is going to to just rip guns out the hands of private citizens.

It takes only one people-oriented appointee.

WTF do you expect from this court? seriously?

I should never have told this bunch my age. Someone suggesting I'm more senile than - say - Wobbele? The bogus paratrooper, Johnson, The Snipe? My dementia-senility mind boggles.

It boggles even more to a suggestion that my friend who thinks she needs a gun living in a poor part of town just up and move. Uncle Sam allows no such luxuries to his disabled vets. You know, I'm trying to have an open mind about this Great Murrican Craze for blowing away your neighbors, but these postings make that tough. herm

John Paul Stevens and Ruth Bader Ginsburg -- the two oldest Supreme Court justices and half of its liberal wing -- are considered the most likely to retire during the next president's term in office--

YEAH!

Like who the Hell would Want a Stacked Court that has a Carbon Copy Thinking processes and no divergence of opinion!

Only an Idiot Strives for Imbalance!

Says allot about some posters here i suppose!

MURPHY

We're praying TWICE as hard that he ISN'T elected.

Posted by AMERICANUNITY

well Ive got some bad news for you old buddy.
read on this site and look at liberal after liberal who are atheists and demean others for believing. just how are they going to pray at all much less twice for anything. Im not saying god is on our side because many on the other side dont believe in God in the first place.

BUT this is a really major issue to the campaign isnt it. THANK GOD that Bush was there to appoint Roberts and the other guy
first of all........the 2nd amendment would have been REMOVED BY THE COURT....NOT part of their duties......and thats just for staters........

Its ok AU i hope they steal your house and put up a meth clinic.

rwd

Posted by rightwingdon at 2008-07-13 10:58 PM | Reply | Flag: Flag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e

RWD

Wow, what an idiotic statement

At least you're good for a chuckle

Posted by AMERICANUNITY at

yeah and once upon a time if someone told you that the government would spend tax money on places for people breaking the law to have shelter while a oompany broke the law to hire them, you would say the same thing.........and there are countless other examples of things that once upon a time, IF I had told you about it, you would have scoffed at me too........
more of the liberal manure left upon society.......

read on this site and look at liberal after liberal who are atheists and demean others for believing.
Posted by bushlovertwo

Off topic, but I think that criticizing somebody for illogical notions is far less offensive to me than telling somebody they are doomed to everlasting torment for not believing something, or that they are not metaphysically chosen for special treatment due to the accident of their birth.

Says allot about some posters here i suppose!

LOL. One of the best self retorts you've ever come up with redneckshill.

BBW, 'allot' means to proportion or dole out. 'A lot' means in sizable quantity.

IMO, a balanced Supreme Court, with a legit swing vote, is the best set up. Like a balance between the WH and Congress (one held by one party, the other by the other party. That comes closest to ensuring that only issues with broad appeal and support get passed. I am very much opposed to wish-list issues of one party or the other becoming law.

The issue of owning weapons is inbred in the American psyche even more than democracy. And, as long as there is some limit (no stingers, machine guns, tanks, etc.) I have no problem with it. Still, the second amendment is a very interesting piece of legislation--. The first set of amendments (the first 10) was passed with the intent of assuring certain rights of citizens. The second amendment very visibly stands out among this group. It stands out because it not only brings in the issue of the militia. But also because it employs a sentence which, when syntexed by English language rules, presents a conditional statement, an if-then--, which places gun ownership within the sphere of the militia. And thus we have the debate which has raged in legal circles. And IMO will continue to do so. That is, should the first 10 amendments be viewed only in the context of a group dynamic--, or do we interpret the wording of the second within itself. I did notice that Scalia mentioned, as part of his argument, the necessity of employing the first mentioned viewpoint.

Since the next president is going to be a conservative republican or a conservative democrat, what type of replacement do you think we're going to get?

bait and switch wins again, my friends.

Posted by Hagbard_Celine at

boy do they have you hoodwinked...

mccain, I suppose, is you conservative republican??? you have to be kidding.
BUT WAIT......you think barrywayne is a conservative democrat??????

wow....bought any bridges lately????
obama is doing the old campaign two step to the middel.THIS is not how he would run the country and anyone who believes that is a real sucker and apparently is in line for that cnn/msnbc/npr koolaid line..............

What about Barack Obama is "conservative" as far as democrats go?
Posted by JOE

"1) FISA
2) relaxing separation of church and state..
3) expanding the military."

1. His position on FISA is consistent with that of Nancy Pelosi. Thus, he is not "conservative as far as democrats go" with regard to fisa.

2. His recent comments on church and state are pandering at best. Give one example of his legislative history that would indicate a conservative position on this issue.

3. Same answer for expanding the military.

where in the hell is that SPELLCHEKT?????????

Joe,
1) just because Pelosi agrees, does not mean its not a conservative position. Pelosi think's the president hasn't done anything warranting impeachment. How much more conservative a position can you have?

2) Pandering? You're calling him a liar? Status quo we can believe in, if I'm supposed to take your meaning. Flexible integrity if ever I saw it.

3) Okay, accepting your opinion here, he has campaigned from the very beginning (and has not deviated from) on a policy that will keep over 50,000 troop in iraq indefinitely, plus over 100,000 contractors while simultaneously saying that he is ending the war.

"THIS is not how he would run the country and anyone who believes that is a real sucker and apparently is in line for that cnn/msnbc/npr koolaid line"

Posted by bushlovertwo

BLtwo, whose side are you on, anyway? Are you arguing for or against Obama? You're all over the place.

"Would anybody seriously want a 7 Justice Conservative majority in the SC?"

Posted by moder8 at 2008-07-13 08:46 PM

Yes, I would. Since liberalism is a mental disorder, the fewer liberals available for making decisions on the Supreme Court, the better.

"Since liberalism is a mental disorder, the fewer liberals available for making decisions on the Supreme Court, the better"
--------------------

Ya got THAT right Bub!!

FACT!

I am still trying to figure out how Obama plans on blurring the separation between church and state? Is giving funding to an organization who takes on the goverment's role as provider to those in need really an infraction of the separation of church and state rules? If that is the case then churches should not be tax exempt either. Do you realize that these churches, along with other community organizations (some of which may not be churches but have a clear religious motive) are some of the best relief providers, and that they consistently do a better job at helping out the poor and needy when compared to other entitlement programs run by the feds? You can't expect these organizations to run on donations alone when their resposnibilities are ever expanding. Federal funding helps these organizations stay afloat which in turn reduces the federal burden of caring for the needy.

BUT this is a really major issue to the campaign isnt it. THANK GOD that Bush was there to appoint Roberts and the other guy
first of all........the 2nd amendment would have been REMOVED BY THE COURT....NOT part of their duties......and thats just for staters........

YEAH!

Unimpeachable proof that BLT doesnt even own a firearm!

I own several and my 2nd amendment right was never in doubt!

Why do I say this ------ because I could put one in my hand and I know how to use it!

Personally I dont know a single gun owner who would voluntarily turn theirs over to a government man regardless of any hoity toity court ruling!

But apparently the idea of defending himself FROM government makes BLT shrink and spurs ideas of his own inner weakness and fondness to unwavering capitulation to authority!

Anyone who Feared the Government was going to Take Them Away-- are in fact unworthy of having them (because their just pussies anyway who would never use them in their intended purpose ---- to fight off an oppressive government)!

THIS is not how he would run the country and anyone who believes that is a real sucker and apparently is in line for that cnn/msnbc/npr koolaid line"

Posted by bushlovertwo

BLtwo, whose side are you on, anyway? Are you arguing for or against Obama? You're all over the place.

Posted by Hagbard_Celine a

maybe I missed something....did you not call obama a conservative democrat????

Ya got THAT right Bub!!

FACT!

Posted by James_Dean at

DAMMIT JIMMY........you just said that to me on another thread........I feel so cheap.......yuk yuk

I stay on the COMMENTS page to see ALL threads!

FACT!

A few posters find neither O'Bama nor McSame conservative enough. The idea blows me away.

We REALLY have not a horse race but a ritual involving an older-than-Reagan ideologue not quite at the Coulter/Malkin/Thomas/Sowells stage and a centrist who backed increased wiretaps, overt war in Iran and pushed his onetime minister under the bus. Swell. herm

Do you realize that these churches, along with other community organizations (some of which may not be churches but have a clear religious motive) are some of the best relief providers, and that they consistently do a better job at helping out the poor and needy when compared to other entitlement programs run by the feds? You can't expect these organizations to run on donations alone when their resposnibilities are ever expanding. Federal funding helps these organizations stay afloat which in turn reduces the federal burden of caring for the needy.
Posted by taxman

If what was cheapest was all we needed to worry ourselves about, we wouldn't need a constitution.

If what was cheapest was all we needed to worry ourselves about, we wouldn't need a constitution

You have yet to show me where there has been a breach of the separation of church and state. It not only is more efficient, it is constitutional.

Here I'll draw out the Supreme Court test regarding the establishment clause and you can tell me where these organizations fail:

In short, the establishment clause prohibits law "respectin an establishment of religion." Thus, a state CANNOT require any form of religious observance, advance any religion over another, or advance religion over non religion.

According to Lemon v. Kurtzman the government MAY extend benefits to religious institutions so long as the government satiisfies a three part test:

1) The government program must have a secular legislative purpose;

2) The principal or primary effect of the benefit can neither advance nor inhibit religion; and,

3) There is no "excessive governmental entaglement" with religion - for example, the government can't regulate sermons in exchange for funding the church's programs.

Who gives a flying fuck who's on the Supreme Court ?

The Supreme Court is a political joke as the 2000 Election proved by putting the lame brain asshole we now know have and have had in White House for the last 7-1/2 Years.

I just can't imagine what kind of Justice John McCain and the "Bullshit Express" would pick to fill the next vacancy but I would bet $10,000 it will be someone who wants us to stay in Iraq for the next 1000 years and exploit Iraqi Oil.

Who gives a flying fuck who's
on the Supreme Court ?

Oh, only about 90% of informed voters and people who give a shit about the fate of the country. That's all.

The Supreme Court is a political joke as the 2000 Election proved by putting the lame brain asshole we now know have and have had in White House for the last 7-1/2 Years.

No, just because you disagree with their ruling doesn't mean it wasn't a lawful ruling.

I just can't imagine what kind of Justice John McCain and the "Bullshit Express" would pick to fill the next vacancy but I would bet $10,000 it will be someone who wants us to stay in Iraq for the next 1000 years and exploit Iraqi Oil.

Just showing your ignorance. You're misquoting a statement and where the fuck is the oil we've been exploiting?

Wanna try again, maybe this time using some facts instead of lame commentary?

"a balanced Supreme Court, with a legit swing vote, is the best set up."

This leaves Anthony Kennedy running the country, since everything for the time being will be on a 5-4 vote. At least Bush IN THEORY has a court empowered to set him right when he says the law does not apply to him. Justice Kennedy has no such restraint. We need not a "balanced" court but a human court. herm

Just showing your ignorance. You're misquoting a statement and where the fuck is the oil we've been exploiting?

Wanna try again, maybe this time using some facts instead of lame commentary?

Posted by humanear at 2008-07-14 05:51 PM

You want proof we are exploiting Iraqi Oil (Or at least trying desperately too) ??

Read the attached article by Naomi Klein from the "Nation". Make sure you read the part under "Iraq Disaster: We broke it we (just) bought it"

But then again people like you are the type who helped coin the phrase "Ignorance is Bliss" and "GOD Bless the Great and Almighty USA"

Because in the end it really isn't really John McCains "Straight Talk Express"... Its John McCains "Jive Talking bullshit Express"

And if anyone thinks John McCain's comment about staying in Iraq for the next 100-1000 years is about anything other than securing Iraq Oil for American Interest..THEY ARE FULL OF SHIT !!!

Anyone who Feared the Government was going to Take Them Away-- are in fact unworthy of having them (because their just pussies anyway who would never use them in their intended purpose ---- to fight off an oppressive government)!

Posted by Redneckville at 2008-07-14 01:12 PM | Reply

LOL. Check WACO for the results of such logic. Check Ruby Ridge. Want some people who were really armed and tried to stand against our government? Ask the German Army. Ask the Iraqi army.

Let's see you charge a tank and show us you aren't a pussy. Your second amendment does nothing other than to assure terrorists they have a ready supply of arms when they need it, and assures criminals of all the weapons they need to rob what they want. Your gun can't protect you from the government--and it can't protect you if someone wants what you have in your house. It gives you the illusion of protection--nothing else.