FN Herstal Firearms banner

1 - 4 of 4 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,479 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
But, I don't want to live like a bushman.

http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2037987/posts

The Illinois senator claimed that high fuel prices “have given us a ‘window-of-opportunity’ to change the way we live. Senator McCain would us throw away this opportunity by taking actions that enable us to continue our addiction to the ways of the past—driving our cars wherever and whenever we want, cranking up the air conditioning in our homes, depending on electric appliances to do our work, staying up after sundown—this is the unnatural lifestyle we need to put behind us if we care about the fate of the planet.”
And pelozi demonstrates some real logic here...

In related news, Cuba has reportedly made a deal with China to drill for oil off the coast of the Florida Keys—exposing American shores to the risk of environmental damage that the U.S. ban on off-shore drilling is meant to prevent. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) insisted this would not change her opposition to allowing U.S. firms to drill in this area. “We can’t be held responsible for what others do,” Pelosi said. “Even if there are oil spills from Chinese drilling, our hands will be clean. No one can blame us.”
Heaven forbid we drill in our own waters. It's much better to take the highroad and and let Russia or China have it so we can keep buying from where we are... since any oil spill won't be caused by us... I'm sure that makes sense, oh nevermind.

------------------------------------------

Now on this next topic... is mr obama saying he doesn't think the Supreme Court should back to the Founding Fathers when deciding on a cases Constitutionality? Did he say he wants the Supreme Court to change Constitutional Law to their will? What do you think this means? "Adapt the Laws"

http://www.azconservative.org/Semmens1.htm

“Senator McCain has said he will appoint men who look to the past for guidance on how they will rule on the cases brought to them,” Obama pointed out. “If you want judges to play such a passive and uninspired role, maybe you should vote for him because I will appoint active judges who look to the future for inspiration.”

“We need people who can adapt the laws to meet our current and future needs, not old men who are content to quote from old documents,” Obama said. “There will be times when the political processes are at a stalemate, when legislators or voters are unable to take action. We need judges who can break these logjams. We need men and women of vision and the strength of character to lead this nation to new legal paradigms. I will appoint such men and women.”

Queried for some examples of the type of person he is looking for as a prospective Supreme Court Justice, Obama mentioned Senator Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) and former senator John Edwards as “two people with outstanding credentials and the creativity we so sorely need on the bench.”
With hillary and edwards on the bench.... *shiver*

The Supreme Courts job is to interpret existing law... they are mainly an appealet court, (they hear appeals from lower courts) Their job IS NOT TO MAKE LAW!!!

"The Supreme Court of the United States acts as the highest authority in the 3rd branch of our government---the judicial branch. Its job is to interpret the Constitution and in doing so, it decides cases in which there needs to be an important clarification in the law. There are nine justices on the Court and they hear cases that have been appealed through the justice system. Thus, when the Court rules in a case, that ruling is the last resort for the defendants. The Court is an important part of our government, intended to be free from political influence and therefore able to make crucial decisions about the law and how it is applied."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
373 Posts
I had the "living document crap" talk with my brother the other day.

My argument is what is the point of a constitution if anyone can just come along and change it or its meaning.

You change the constitution by amending it, but that is just to hard for people who want their personal opinions and ideologies implemented without support from the majority of the country.

Its kind of funny if you think about it. President Bush eroded away our civil liberties and rights to privacy and any future Democrat wants to erode away at the constitution to take away even more of our personal rights and liberties.

To me we are getting screwed by both sides who sometimes seem to be working in concert even with all the publicized strife and divide.


Concert:
3. agreement of two or more individuals in a design or plan; combined action; accord or harmony
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/concert
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,519 Posts
I agree, Republican/Democrat makes no difference, they are two sides of the same coin. They both are crap. We need a third party. How about "We the Peoples" party?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,479 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
devildoc said:
How about "We the Peoples" party?
:-D

We the peeps!

Yes, we do need an option better than what we have now. The people we need in ofice can't get nominated or elected. :(
 
1 - 4 of 4 Posts
Top