Elizabeth Warren Sez!

[Teatownclown]

7 to 2 decision.

Justice White was appointed by Kennedy and Justice Powell appointed by Nixon.  Go figure....

Talk about a role reversal.  Or maybe they were just looking at law and the Constitution versus the rhetoric and dogma that surrounds the topic today.  And didn't you have to study all this in law school??  That would seem to be one of the significant point cases they would want a lawyer to be familiar with??

And Stewart was appointed by Eisenhower.  Info on the rest is out there for those interested - this is small sample.  Shows that the world was a very different place than today.

Yes....thanks to the GOP we've regressed just according to their plan. America needs to wake up.

[guido911]

Oh, look everyone. He knows the words every first year business law and poli sci student learned. Except he can't quite figure out context.

Um, duh, that's why I used it. Because it is such a simple damned concept.



Keep it up and I will have to recommend the training wheels again for you in this forum. bwahahahaha.

[AquaMan]

Um, duh, that's why I used it. Because it is such a simple damned concept.



Keep it up and I will have to recommend the training wheels again for you in this forum. bwahahahaha.

You ain't fooling anyone Geebers. A 7-2 decision made by an assortment of judges appointed by Republican and Democratic presidents over three decades doesn't get overturned easily. In fact it doesn't even get assailed. Your point was that Liberals favor abortions and were responsible for their legality neither of which is true. In any case you certainly don't bother to explain how they are to blame. Blurting out stare decisis like it meant something in this context doesn't help your case.

This isn't even in keeping with this thread, which of course is in keeping with your style.

[guido911]

You ain't fooling anyone Geebers. A 7-2 decision made by an assortment of judges appointed by Republican and Democratic presidents over three decades doesn't get overturned easily. In fact it doesn't even get assailed. Your point was that Liberals favor abortions and were responsible for their legality neither of which is true. In any case you certainly don't bother to explain how they are to blame. Blurting out stare decisis like it meant something in this context doesn't help your case.

This isn't even in keeping with this thread, which of course is in keeping with your style.

I am not going to waste my time debating you over court composition or how the court reaches decisions. Indeed, Reagan appointed Souter and O'Conner (Google Gonzalez v. Carhart), not exactly two flaming conservatives out to end abortion.  And again, duh, my whole point is that overturning a decision is a very difficult proposition--which is why it hasn't been overturned. Roe seems to be being systematically dismantled (see Carhart), though, and my hope is that it will die from the proverbial death of a thousand cuts rather than outright overturned.

As for the point, yours was to paint only liberals as responsible for the voting rights/civil rights acts of the 1960s. Of course, there were no conservatives that participated in those decisions  --not to mention no discussion about that flaming conservative FDR who rounded up and imprisoned all those Japanese people in WWII. Also, what about those southern democrats like Al Gore's daddy and the Kleagle who filibustered parts of those huge LIBERAL-only accomplishments that went overlooked by O'Donnell and you.

As for abortion, tell me how many conservatives favor abortion or Roe v. Wade and who they are, because I can put out a mega-list of liberals who do. And it's kinda late to be b!tching about thread drift, since you joined in @ssclowns post about liberals and civil rights in a thread about Fauxcahontas.

[nathanm]

As for abortion, tell me how many conservatives favor abortion or Roe v. Wade and who they are, because I can put out a mega-list of liberals who do. And it's kinda late to be b!tching about thread drift, since you joined in @ssclowns post about liberals and civil rights in a thread about Fauxcahontas.

You make two errors. First, all Democrats are not liberal. Second, you assume that all or almost all of those who identify as conservative are all pro lifers. Neither of which is actually true.

[AquaMan]

I am not going to waste my time debating you over court composition or how the court reaches decisions. Indeed, Reagan appointed Souter and O'Conner (Google Gonzalez v. Carhart), not exactly two flaming conservatives out to end abortion.  And again, duh, my whole point is that overturning a decision is a very difficult proposition--which is why it hasn't been overturned. Roe seems to be being systematically dismantled (see Carhart), though, and my hope is that it will die from the proverbial death of a thousand cuts rather than outright overturned.

As for the point, yours was to paint only liberals as responsible for the voting rights/civil rights acts of the 1960s. Of course, there were no conservatives that participated in those decisions  --not to mention no discussion about that flaming conservative FDR who rounded up and imprisoned all those Japanese people in WWII. Also, what about those southern democrats like Al Gore's daddy and the Kleagle who filibustered parts of those huge LIBERAL-only accomplishments that went overlooked by O'Donnell and you.

As for abortion, tell me how many conservatives favor abortion or Roe v. Wade and who they are, because I can put out a mega-list of liberals who do. And it's kinda late to be b!tching about thread drift, since you joined in @ssclowns post about liberals and civil rights in a thread about Fauxcahontas.

You know, I have no interest in wasting any more time on you either. Suffice it to say, you're just a dick. Not a hard one,  but a small, shriveled, largely unused dick.

[guido911]

You know, I have no interest in wasting any more time on you either. Suffice it to say, you're just a dick. Not a hard one,  but a small, shriveled, largely unused dick.

I'm so mad. I could just change my handle.....Bwahahaha.

[AquaMan]

I'm so mad. I could just change my handle.....Bwahahaha.

You are quite mad. But you have no guts. You snipe away anonymously and with impunity. People think because you're a lawyer that you're also smart. But smart people don't behave like you. They don't show pictures of pregnant women smoking and drinking beer to imply that only stupid trailer trash girls get abortions. They realize that abortions occur through all demographics from the coach who impregnated a private school student and had to pay for one to the assault victim who doesn't even know the father. To you they are all the same. Just liberal Democrats.

Hey, quick question. What if Himmler, Hitler and Goebbels gang raped your wife? Your view change any?

[heironymouspasparagus]

If having guts means thinking about moving out of the country to avoid military service, call me gutless.

Hey, quick answer: What if worms had machine guns, then birds wouldn't f$ck with them?  This is what my drill sergeant often said when enlistees kept asking dumbassed hypothetical questions.

How could you have considered moving out of the country to avoid military??  You weren't in danger of mandatory service...so the comment is irrelevant.

[guido911]

How could you have considered moving out of the country to avoid military??  You weren't in danger of mandatory service...so the comment is irrelevant.

I am going to delete that post. Too inflammatory and not helpful.

[RecycleMichael]

This thread has gone bad.

[guido911]

This thread has gone bad.

[Red Arrow]

How do you delete posts?  I have never been able to make that happen....

You can only remove your own posts.   

Go to the thread rather than the latest posts and one of the options on your posts will be to remove a post.

[heironymouspasparagus]

You can only remove your own posts.   

Go to the thread rather than the latest posts and one of the options on your posts will be to remove a post.

I just found it and removed that post as a test.  One of those "duh" moments...the button is right next to the modify button, which I use from time to time.

[Teatownclown]

This thread has gone bad.

Oh sh!t .... you're not going to yank another one of my......threads ? Are you?  I can't help it if Guido, Gaspar, and Conan are dicks nerds.

I always suspected RM and Admin were secretly conspiring....

Brilliant diversion http://baystateliberal.blogspot.com/2012/06/brilliant-diversion.html

It's time to declare the obvious: the Scott Brown campaign is running circles around Elizabeth Warren on tactics.

In a magnificent feint, Brown votes to reject an equal pay for women measure and the headlines talk about candidate debates. The Globe headlines of course: the Herald didn't even bother with the vote.

Warren's camp of course is highly culpable for this piece of journalistic misdirection, having hemmed and hawed for a couple of days after Warren dropped the debate gauntlet herself at the Democratic nominating convention.

Brown immediately picked it up and offered to meet on conservative radio talkmaster Dan Rea's show. Warren balked, a strange move since Rea's audience is a step or two above most yak shows, leaving her in a defensive crouch on an issue she raised.

And while Brown is anything but consistent between rhetoric and action, his campaign has shown it consistently thinks one or two moves ahead on the tactical chess board. Which brings us to the pay equality vote.

Senator Double Talk, who has proclaimed the importance of the women in his life, joined the Senate Republican minority in rejecting the Paycheck Fairness Act, designed to close a gap where women get paid 77 cents for every dollar received by a man,

Brown and the GOP declared the measure would impose "unfair burdens" on employers when called upon to explain and lead to "frivolous" lawsuits. Oh, those silly women.

In a brilliant tactical move (again), Brown trotted out Maine's Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins as cover in declaring they really are for the bill even though they voted against it.
"It's the right cause but the wrong bill,'' Brown said after the vote.
Brown has based his Senate career on saying one thing while doing another: rejecting equal pay for women while supporting Wall Street is perhaps the biggest contradiction of all.

And unless the Warren campaign gets on the stick and starts thinking better strategically, they are going to let him get away with the doublespeak.

Keep this thread alive!