Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Colossus_500 on October 24, 2008, 08:55:54 AM
-
Newspaper shows Obama belonged to socialist party
Democrat's campaign denied allegations, but new evidence indicates membership
Posted: October 24, 2008
12:50 am Eastern
By Aaron Klein, WorldNetDaily.com (http://WorldNetDaily.com)
JERUSALEM – Evidence has emerged that Sen. Barack Obama belonged to a socialist political party that sought to elect members to public office with the aim of moving the Democratic Party far leftward to ultimately form a new political party with a socialist agenda.
Several blogs, including Powerline, previously documented that while running for the Illinois state Senate in 1996 as a Democrat, Obama actively sought and received the endorsement of the socialist-oriented New Party, with some blogs claiming Obama was a member of the controversial party.
The New Party, formed by members of the Democratic Socialists for America and leaders of an offshoot of the Community Party USA, was an electoral alliance that worked alongside the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, or ACORN. The New Party's aim was to help elect politicians to office who espouse its policies.
Among New Party members was linguist and radical activist Noam Chomsky.
Obama's campaign has responded to the allegations, denying the presidential candidate was ever a member of the New Party.
But the New Zeal blog dug up print copies of the New Party News, the party's official newspaper, which show Obama posing with New Party leaders, list him as a New Party member and include quotes from him.
The party's Spring 1996 newspaper boasted: "New Party members won three other primaries this Spring in Chicago: Barack Obama (State Senate), Michael Chandler (Democratic Party Committee) and Patricia Martin (Cook County Judiciary). The paper quoted Obama saying "these victories prove that small 'd' democracy can work."
The newspaper lists other politicians it endorsed who were not members but specifies Obama as a New Party member.
New Ground, the newsletter of Chicago's Democratic Socialists for America, reported in its July/August 1996 edition that Obama attended a New Party membership meeting April 11, 1996, in which he expressed his gratitude for the group's support and "encouraged NPers (New Party members) to join in his task forces on Voter Education and Voter Registration."
Becoming a New Party member requires some effort on behalf of the politician. Candidates must be approved by the party's political committee and, once approved, must sign a contract mandating they will have a "visible and active relationship" with the party.
The New Party, established in 1992, took advantage of what was known as electoral "fusion," which enabled candidates to run on two tickets simultaneously, attracting voters from both parties. But the New Party went defunct in 1998, one year after fusion was halted by the Supreme Court.
Following the initial reports of Obama's purported membership in the New Party, Obama associate and former Chicago New Party activist Carl Davidson posted a statement on several blogs claiming his former party was not socialist, but he admitted it worked with ACORN.
"[The New Party] was a pragmatic party of 'small d democracy' mainly promoting economic reforms like the living wage and testing the fusion tactic, common in many countries but only operational in New York in the U.S. The main trend within it was ACORN, an Alinskyist outfit, which is hardly Marxist," wrote Davidson.
But the socialist goals of the New Party were enumerated on its old website.
Among the New Party's stated objectives were "full employment, a shorter work week, and a guaranteed minimum income for all adults; a universal 'social wage' to include such basic benefits as health care, child care, vacation time, and lifelong access to education and training; a systematic phase-in of comparable worth and like programs to ensure gender equity."
The New Party stated it also sought "the democratization of our banking and financial system – including popular election of those charged with public stewardship of our banking system, worker-owner control over their pension assets, community-controlled alternative financial institutions."
Many of the New Party's founding members were Democratic Socialists for America leaders and members of Committees of Correspondence, a breakaway of the Communist Party USA. Obama attended several DSA events and meetings, including a DSA-sponsored town hall meeting Feb. 25, 1996, entitled "Employment and Survival in Urban America." He sought and received an endorsement from the DSA.
According to DSA documents, the New Party worked with ACORN to promote its candidates. ACORN, convicted in massive, nationwide voter fraud cases, has been a point of controversy for Obama over the presidential candidate's ties to the group.
In 1995, the DSA's New Ground newsletter stated, "In Chicago, the New Party's biggest asset and biggest liability is ACORN.
"Like most organizations, ACORN is a mixed bag. On one hand, in Chicago, ACORN is a group that attempts to organize some of the most depressed communities in the city. Chicago organizers for ACORN and organizers for SEIU Local 880 have been given modest monthly recruitment quotas for new New Party members. On the other hand, like most groups that depend on canvassing for fundraising, it's easy enough to find burned out and disgruntled former employees. And ACORN has not had the reputation for being interested in coalition politics – until recently and, happily, not just within the New Party."
First Pic: Excerpt from New Party publication (Courtesy New Zeal blog)
Second Pic: Barack Obama pictured in New Party publication (Courtesy New Zeal blog)
Third Pic: Missoula New Party
-
If Chomsky is ok with it, I'm ok with it :)
They're social democratic, I don't see the problem... Sanders is pretty popular, that's what he is.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Party_(United_States)
If this is your October surprise, I think it's going to fall flat.
-
Newspaper shows Obama belonged to socialist party
Democrat's campaign denied allegations, but new evidence indicates membership
Posted: October 24, 2008
12:50 am Eastern
By Aaron Klein, WorldNetDaily.com (http://WorldNetDaily.com)
JERUSALEM – Evidence has emerged that Sen. Barack Obama belonged to a socialist political party that sought to elect members to public office with the aim of moving the Democratic Party far leftward to ultimately form a new political party with a socialist agenda.
Several blogs, including Powerline, previously documented that while running for the Illinois state Senate in 1996 as a Democrat, Obama actively sought and received the endorsement of the socialist-oriented New Party, with some blogs claiming Obama was a member of the controversial party.
The New Party, formed by members of the Democratic Socialists for America and leaders of an offshoot of the Community Party USA, was an electoral alliance that worked alongside the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, or ACORN. The New Party's aim was to help elect politicians to office who espouse its policies.
Among New Party members was linguist and radical activist Noam Chomsky.
Obama's campaign has responded to the allegations, denying the presidential candidate was ever a member of the New Party.
But the New Zeal blog dug up print copies of the New Party News, the party's official newspaper, which show Obama posing with New Party leaders, list him as a New Party member and include quotes from him.
The party's Spring 1996 newspaper boasted: "New Party members won three other primaries this Spring in Chicago: Barack Obama (State Senate), Michael Chandler (Democratic Party Committee) and Patricia Martin (Cook County Judiciary). The paper quoted Obama saying "these victories prove that small 'd' democracy can work."
The newspaper lists other politicians it endorsed who were not members but specifies Obama as a New Party member.
New Ground, the newsletter of Chicago's Democratic Socialists for America, reported in its July/August 1996 edition that Obama attended a New Party membership meeting April 11, 1996, in which he expressed his gratitude for the group's support and "encouraged NPers (New Party members) to join in his task forces on Voter Education and Voter Registration."
Becoming a New Party member requires some effort on behalf of the politician. Candidates must be approved by the party's political committee and, once approved, must sign a contract mandating they will have a "visible and active relationship" with the party.
The New Party, established in 1992, took advantage of what was known as electoral "fusion," which enabled candidates to run on two tickets simultaneously, attracting voters from both parties. But the New Party went defunct in 1998, one year after fusion was halted by the Supreme Court.
Following the initial reports of Obama's purported membership in the New Party, Obama associate and former Chicago New Party activist Carl Davidson posted a statement on several blogs claiming his former party was not socialist, but he admitted it worked with ACORN.
"[The New Party] was a pragmatic party of 'small d democracy' mainly promoting economic reforms like the living wage and testing the fusion tactic, common in many countries but only operational in New York in the U.S. The main trend within it was ACORN, an Alinskyist outfit, which is hardly Marxist," wrote Davidson.
But the socialist goals of the New Party were enumerated on its old website.
Among the New Party's stated objectives were "full employment, a shorter work week, and a guaranteed minimum income for all adults; a universal 'social wage' to include such basic benefits as health care, child care, vacation time, and lifelong access to education and training; a systematic phase-in of comparable worth and like programs to ensure gender equity."
The New Party stated it also sought "the democratization of our banking and financial system – including popular election of those charged with public stewardship of our banking system, worker-owner control over their pension assets, community-controlled alternative financial institutions."
Many of the New Party's founding members were Democratic Socialists for America leaders and members of Committees of Correspondence, a breakaway of the Communist Party USA. Obama attended several DSA events and meetings, including a DSA-sponsored town hall meeting Feb. 25, 1996, entitled "Employment and Survival in Urban America." He sought and received an endorsement from the DSA.
According to DSA documents, the New Party worked with ACORN to promote its candidates. ACORN, convicted in massive, nationwide voter fraud cases, has been a point of controversy for Obama over the presidential candidate's ties to the group.
In 1995, the DSA's New Ground newsletter stated, "In Chicago, the New Party's biggest asset and biggest liability is ACORN.
"Like most organizations, ACORN is a mixed bag. On one hand, in Chicago, ACORN is a group that attempts to organize some of the most depressed communities in the city. Chicago organizers for ACORN and organizers for SEIU Local 880 have been given modest monthly recruitment quotas for new New Party members. On the other hand, like most groups that depend on canvassing for fundraising, it's easy enough to find burned out and disgruntled former employees. And ACORN has not had the reputation for being interested in coalition politics – until recently and, happily, not just within the New Party."
First Pic: Excerpt from New Party publication (Courtesy New Zeal blog)
Second Pic: Barack Obama pictured in New Party publication (Courtesy New Zeal blog)
Third Pic: Missoula New Party
I saw this last night but it was too late for me to post. Good job Colossus.
-
I saw this last night but it was too late for me to post. Good job Colossus.
good job on what? a democratic socialist isn't bad. A secessionist party is, like Palin and Todd supported...
-
Well there goes my vote for Obama.
Oh yeah, I wasn't voting for him anyways.
-
Well there goes my vote for Obama.
Oh yeah, I wasn't voting for him anyways.
LOL!
-
I saw this last night but it was too late for me to post. Good job Colossus.
It's still got to make it to the air waves and the television networks. And I'm not holding my breath on that.
-
Well there goes my vote for Obama.
Oh yeah, I wasn't voting for him anyways.
You should change your mind, I sence you've thought about it a little bit?
-
It's still got to make it to the air waves and the television networks. And I'm not holding my breath on that.
it will...
-
I don't care for the bullshit criticizms of Obama, and there are many. This is the stuff that concerns me. When you look at all these things as a whole, it gives you a clear perspective of how Obama came to power. This is a problem.
-
Cmon guys be reasonable. All that information is obviously fake and everyone is lying. Besides, whats wrong with socialism anyway? Dont you think poor people deserve your money for no reason?
-
it will...
You really think so? Maybe CNN and Fox, but not the major networks.
-
You really think so? Maybe CNN and Fox, but not the major networks.
yea, if it runs on CNN and Fox, it will be replied to by Olbermann/others... It wouldn't take much to blow this up big. I hate the idea but I've seen them do it time and time again... This would fit perfect into McCain's attack of redistribution of wealth and if Fox starts pounding it, the others can't ignore it. I could easily see this happening.
-
You should change your mind, I sence you've thought about it a little bit?
Sorry, Hugo. I strongly disagree with Obama on taxes and maintaining a military presence overseas.
I'm not voting for McLame either.
-
Sorry, Hugo. I strongly disagree with Obama on taxes and maintaining a military presence overseas.
I'm not voting for McLame either.
expand, what exactly don't you like about Obama's tax plan and what do you mean by, "maintaining a military presence overseas?"
On the side, I forgot, you're a fellow Marine or am I remembering wrong?
-
What's so appalling is that conservatives are only seeing this now.
Many voting for Obama have examined this a long time ago and didn't see anything alarming.
-
Newspaper shows Obama belonged to socialist party
Democrat's campaign denied allegations, but new evidence indicates membership
Posted: October 24, 2008
12:50 am Eastern
By Aaron Klein, WorldNetDaily.com (http://WorldNetDaily.com)
JERUSALEM – Evidence has emerged that Sen. Barack Obama belonged to a socialist political party that sought to elect members to public office with the aim of moving the Democratic Party far leftward to ultimately form a new political party with a socialist agenda.
Several blogs, including Powerline, previously documented that while running for the Illinois state Senate in 1996 as a Democrat, Obama actively sought and received the endorsement of the socialist-oriented New Party, with some blogs claiming Obama was a member of the controversial party.
The New Party, formed by members of the Democratic Socialists for America and leaders of an offshoot of the Community Party USA, was an electoral alliance that worked alongside the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, or ACORN. The New Party's aim was to help elect politicians to office who espouse its policies.
Among New Party members was linguist and radical activist Noam Chomsky.
Obama's campaign has responded to the allegations, denying the presidential candidate was ever a member of the New Party.
But the New Zeal blog dug up print copies of the New Party News, the party's official newspaper, which show Obama posing with New Party leaders, list him as a New Party member and include quotes from him.
The party's Spring 1996 newspaper boasted: "New Party members won three other primaries this Spring in Chicago: Barack Obama (State Senate), Michael Chandler (Democratic Party Committee) and Patricia Martin (Cook County Judiciary). The paper quoted Obama saying "these victories prove that small 'd' democracy can work."
The newspaper lists other politicians it endorsed who were not members but specifies Obama as a New Party member.
New Ground, the newsletter of Chicago's Democratic Socialists for America, reported in its July/August 1996 edition that Obama attended a New Party membership meeting April 11, 1996, in which he expressed his gratitude for the group's support and "encouraged NPers (New Party members) to join in his task forces on Voter Education and Voter Registration."
Becoming a New Party member requires some effort on behalf of the politician. Candidates must be approved by the party's political committee and, once approved, must sign a contract mandating they will have a "visible and active relationship" with the party.
The New Party, established in 1992, took advantage of what was known as electoral "fusion," which enabled candidates to run on two tickets simultaneously, attracting voters from both parties. But the New Party went defunct in 1998, one year after fusion was halted by the Supreme Court.
Following the initial reports of Obama's purported membership in the New Party, Obama associate and former Chicago New Party activist Carl Davidson posted a statement on several blogs claiming his former party was not socialist, but he admitted it worked with ACORN.
"[The New Party] was a pragmatic party of 'small d democracy' mainly promoting economic reforms like the living wage and testing the fusion tactic, common in many countries but only operational in New York in the U.S. The main trend within it was ACORN, an Alinskyist outfit, which is hardly Marxist," wrote Davidson.
But the socialist goals of the New Party were enumerated on its old website.
Among the New Party's stated objectives were "full employment, a shorter work week, and a guaranteed minimum income for all adults; a universal 'social wage' to include such basic benefits as health care, child care, vacation time, and lifelong access to education and training; a systematic phase-in of comparable worth and like programs to ensure gender equity."
The New Party stated it also sought "the democratization of our banking and financial system – including popular election of those charged with public stewardship of our banking system, worker-owner control over their pension assets, community-controlled alternative financial institutions."
Many of the New Party's founding members were Democratic Socialists for America leaders and members of Committees of Correspondence, a breakaway of the Communist Party USA. Obama attended several DSA events and meetings, including a DSA-sponsored town hall meeting Feb. 25, 1996, entitled "Employment and Survival in Urban America." He sought and received an endorsement from the DSA.
According to DSA documents, the New Party worked with ACORN to promote its candidates. ACORN, convicted in massive, nationwide voter fraud cases, has been a point of controversy for Obama over the presidential candidate's ties to the group.
In 1995, the DSA's New Ground newsletter stated, "In Chicago, the New Party's biggest asset and biggest liability is ACORN.
"Like most organizations, ACORN is a mixed bag. On one hand, in Chicago, ACORN is a group that attempts to organize some of the most depressed communities in the city. Chicago organizers for ACORN and organizers for SEIU Local 880 have been given modest monthly recruitment quotas for new New Party members. On the other hand, like most groups that depend on canvassing for fundraising, it's easy enough to find burned out and disgruntled former employees. And ACORN has not had the reputation for being interested in coalition politics – until recently and, happily, not just within the New Party."
First Pic: Excerpt from New Party publication (Courtesy New Zeal blog)
Second Pic: Barack Obama pictured in New Party publication (Courtesy New Zeal blog)
Third Pic: Missoula New Party
its funny how people don care about this stuff...hard core democrats and obama so called "followers" can find out hypothetically that obama was a murderer, rapists, socialist, communist...ect...and they would still vote for him......the image of a black man screamin change is soo huge...even if he has no experience or actually had any power they are still doing it......
-
Look at Obama's platform. He's not a socialist. I wish he were but he just isn't.
If he was, he would not work with private insurance companies with his health plan. But he does.
-
What's so appalling is that conservatives are only seeing this now.
Many voting for Obama have examined this a long time ago and didn't see anything alarming.
Because most who are voting for him are in favor of government handouts, don't pay taxes, don't have a job and don't know better. Ask them why they want Obama and the answer is usually "Change" ok....change for what? Aaaa errrrrr ahhhhh!
Besides that Jag, your in Canada and already getting raped on taxes. Wouldn't you like to pay less taxes or at least not have then raised?
-
Look at Obama's platform. He's not a socialist. I wish he were but he just isn't.
If he was, he would not work with private insurance companies with his health plan. But he does.
He's a socialist. Taking money from someone who works hard for their money and family and taking a portion of that to give to someone who has less money (essentially in most cases lazy) is in essence, socialism. It give those people who don't want to work more incentive NOT to work.
-
expand, what exactly don't you like about Obama's tax plan and what do you mean by, "maintaining a military presence overseas?"
On the side, I forgot, you're a fellow Marine or am I remembering wrong?
I disagree with Obama on letting the Bush tax cuts expire. As you may have read, from my many posts on this topic, I'm opposed to the progressive tax system - I think it's morally wrong to penalize someone on their success just because they make more.
It's my opinion that when a person has more disposable income they have more to spend and invest. Either way it makes its way back into the economy. I am also of the opinion that our government is bloated and corrupt. We've seen Bush, in the past 8 years, grow the size of government and abuse it's power (which only confirms my belief that he is not a true conservative but a southern Democrat). I am not of the opinion that if the Democrats take over that it will change. Anyhoo, on taxes I support the Fair Tax Act but I think a flat tax would be a good and fair compromise.
I also think that we, as a nation, need to take a hard look at our foreign policy. We spend billions upon billions on maintaining a military presence overseas. When I was a young I served in the Reagan/Bush/Clinton Navy. During the Cold War I think our military presence was justified but the world has changed and I think it's high time for a lot of these countries to pick up the slack and take responsibility for the defense of their own nations instead of sticking us, the American tax payer, with the bill.
People are right when they say we are responsible for the monsters we create. We made Bin Laden. He was a result of our presence in Afghanistan to combat the Soviet invasion. The same for Saddam Hussein. I am by no means saying we need to become an isolationist country. I'm saying we need to take a hard look at our foreign policy and stop with the meddling and intervention. We can no longer afford it.
-
It's B.S.
But even if it weren't, Socialism isn't always a bad thing.
-
The world's gonna end! The world's gonna end! The world's gonna end! The world's gonna end! The world's gonna end! The world's gonna end! The world's gonna end! The world's gonna end! The world's gonna end! The world's gonna end! The world's gonna end! The world's gonna end! The world's gonna end! The world's gonna end! The world's gonna end! The world's gonna end!
If i work hard and make more money under Obama the government is going to take it all and give it lazy people!
OMG!
-
The world's gonna end! The world's gonna end! The world's gonna end! The world's gonna end! The world's gonna end! The world's gonna end! The world's gonna end! The world's gonna end! The world's gonna end! The world's gonna end! The world's gonna end! The world's gonna end! The world's gonna end! The world's gonna end! The world's gonna end! The world's gonna end!
If i work hard and make more money under Obama the government is going to take it all and give it lazy people!
OMG!
You have seen the light. :)
-
You have seen the light. :)
And the sky is falling :D
-
(http://i453.photobucket.com/albums/qq256/Yourbustedbitch/Coach.jpg)
-
He's a socialist. Taking money from someone who works hard for their money and family and taking a portion of that to give to someone who has less money (essentially in most cases lazy) is in essence, socialism. It give those people who don't want to work more incentive NOT to work.
Reagan, Nixon, Ford, Bush I and Bush the lesser have all, under your definition, redistributed wealth. I would wager that you voted for one if not all of those guys. Except for Nixon.
-
Because most who are voting for him are in favor of government handouts, don't pay taxes, don't have a job and don't know better. Ask them why they want Obama and the answer is usually "Change" ok....change for what? Aaaa errrrrr ahhhhh!
Besides that Jag, your in Canada and already getting raped on taxes. Wouldn't you like to pay less taxes or at least not have then raised?
Of course I would, who wouldn't want to pay less taxes, ...but at what price?
The McCain policy is worse than Obama's plain & simple. We saw what those kinds of slash & burn cut spending policies did, it didn't improve our lives. What we saved on taxes, ending up being spent on alarms and security systems to keep the criminals out, ...and on endless user fees to the point where the savings didn't materialize at all, but the negative impacts on our society were felt far and wide.
You scream about taxes, as if that is the be all and end all. The fact is, there are enough loopholes out there that anyone with money will have a way to shield themselves before the "socialists" can close them all.
-
I disagree with Obama on letting the Bush tax cuts expire. As you may have read, from my many posts on this topic, I'm opposed to the progressive tax system - I think it's morally wrong to penalize someone on their success just because they make more.
It's my opinion that when a person has more disposable income they have more to spend and invest. Either way it makes its way back into the economy. I am also of the opinion that our government is bloated and corrupt. We've seen Bush, in the past 8 years, grow the size of government and abuse it's power (which only confirms my belief that he is not a true conservative but a southern Democrat). I am not of the opinion that if the Democrats take over that it will change. Anyhoo, on taxes I support the Fair Tax Act but I think a flat tax would be a good and fair compromise.
I also think that we, as a nation, need to take a hard look at our foreign policy. We spend billions upon billions on maintaining a military presence overseas. When I was a young I served in the Reagan/Bush/Clinton Navy. During the Cold War I think our military presence was justified but the world has changed and I think it's high time for a lot of these countries to pick up the slack and take responsibility for the defense of their own nations instead of sticking us, the American tax payer, with the bill.
People are right when they say we are responsible for the monsters we create. We made Bin Laden. He was a result of our presence in Afghanistan to combat the Soviet invasion. The same for Saddam Hussein. I am by no means saying we need to become an isolationist country. I'm saying we need to take a hard look at our foreign policy and stop with the meddling and intervention. We can no longer afford it.
So you will be voting for obama afterall? :D
-
So you will be voting for obama afterall? :D
No.
-
No.
hmmm,...then at least please tell me you won't be voting for McCain either?
-
&eurl=http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=243041.0
Do you really need more PROOF?
I think it's safe to say that he is a HARDCORE Socialist , now either accept it and say you support it or don't vote for him.
But voting for him even though you don't support him...that's just wrong.
-
At this point I dont think anything could change the minds of the libs who worship the messiah.
-
What the hell's wrong with you people?
Really.
Obama offers the country a little hope and a little enthusiasm and all you rightwingers can do is denigrate him as Messiah, Zero and other brainless observations. You are the kings of trivial pursuits. No observation is too ridiculous or minor for your type to make.
Thank you for shitcanning the level of political discourse in this country.
Did you rightwingers vote for Bush b/c he was a self-professed UNITER or b/c he wasn't a DIVIDER?
-
For some reason I find, being friends with terroist and wanting to change the fundamentals of a country alot more then a minor observation.
-
For some reason I find, being friends with terroist and wanting to change the fundamentals of a country alot more then a minor observation.
Come on now....
20 years of Wright.
Years with Ayers and loving his book (will you read the book of a terrorist? I know I won't bother to)
Years of ties to Rezco and his money.
Years of ties to ACORN in the forms of jobs,money and voter registration frauds.
Public and personal support of a Communist leader in Kenya.
Deleting Frank Davis from the second edition of his book.
Receiving 150$mil of fraudulent donations deliberately.
Admitting over and over he want to redistribute the wealth.
It's all nothing compared to having a sign that says change.... ::)
-
Oh yeah I forgot lol
Hope and CHANGE!!!!
-
What the hell's wrong with you people?
Really.
Obama offers the country a little hope and a little enthusiasm and all you rightwingers can do is denigrate him as Messiah, Zero and other brainless observations. You are the kings of trivial pursuits. No observation is too ridiculous or minor for your type to make.
Thank you for shitcanning the level of political discourse in this country.
Did you rightwingers vote for Bush b/c he was a self-professed UNITER or b/c he wasn't a DIVIDER?
I voted for Bush on the exact thing that he had promised, which was to appoint strict interpretation justices to the supreme court. He did that with Roberts and Alito. He even tried to fill all of the vacancies for the district and appellant courts, but the Democratic part mastered the art of filibustering. It's unheard of to have appointees hanging in the balance for years at a time!
-
I voted for Bush on the exact thing that he had promised, which was to appoint strict interpretation justices to the supreme court. He did that with Roberts and Alito. He even tried to fill all of the vacancies for the district and appellant courts, but the Democratic part mastered the art of filibustering. It's unheard of to have appointees hanging in the balance for years at a time!
There is no strict constructionist on the Supreme Court. I take that back. If Thomas ever opened his mouth, he might be considered an orginialist. Under Strict Construction, if it existed, we'd still have slaves, women as servants, and child labor...and no abortion.
I have no problem with the democrats showing an iota of spine by keeping Bush's far-right appointments from seeing the light of day. He's done enough damage to our government thank you.
-
Aaron Klein
Reaction
Critics have called Klein's reporting on Obama made up of guilt by association attacks.[29] His first piece on Bill Ayers was criticized by some as "the first major swift-boating of Obama, referring to conservative-led attacks against Presidential candidate John Kerry during the 2004 presidential election. [30] [31][32] CBS News called Klein a "key purveyor of the [anti-Obama] smear campaign." [33]
-
There is no strict constructionist on the Supreme Court. I take that back. If Thomas ever opened his mouth, he might be considered an orginialist. Under Strict Construction, if it existed, we'd still have slaves, women as servants, and child labor...and no abortion.
You mean they wouldn't interpret and apply the 13th Amendment (no slavery), 24th Amendment (women's right to vote), and/or the federal laws prohibiting child labor?
-
You mean they wouldn't interpret and apply the 13th Amendment (no slavery), 24th Amendment (women's right to vote), and/or the federal laws prohibiting child labor?
No, I mean strict constructionism is a meaningless phrase employed to justify the judicial activism of right wing justices.
Whenever I see SC offered up, it usually means originalism. Under that view, none of those amendments are legitimate.
-
No, I mean strict constructionism is a meaningless phrase employed to justify the judicial activism of right wing justices.
Whenever I see SC offered up, it usually means originalism. Under that view, none of those amendments are legitimate.
How so? "Originalism" means the Constitution can never be amended?
-
How so? "Originalism" means the Constitution can never be amended?
It can be amended. It shouldn't waver from the Framer's original intent. That's originalism.
It's just a way of interpretation. Believe me, Thomas and Scalia do not think Roe v. Wade is good law. It's the supreme law of the land. But it's horrible law to these originalists.
Somehow, their gift for textualism gives them the ability to divine the intent of men dead for over 200 years.
-
It can be amended. It shouldn't waver from the Framer's original intent. That's originalism.
It's just a way of interpretation. Believe me, Thomas and Scalia do not think Roe v. Wade is good law. It's the supreme law of the land. But it's horrible law to these originalists.
Somehow, their gift for textualism gives them the ability to divine the intent of men dead for over 200 years.
Unless the Framer's intended that the Constitution could never be amended, I don't see how an interpretation that slavery is the law of the land, in direct conflict with the 13th Amendment, is possible.
Doesn't matter how long they have been dead. The document doesn't change over time based on some judge's interpretation. If times change, then we amend the document, not our interpretation of the document. I have no problem with that.
If some judges aren't consistent with how they interpret the Constitution, that's a problem with judges, not the Constitution.
-
You guys are so afraid of socialism but you obviously haven't been paying attention for the past 30 years, it's already here. The whole bail out plan is a PURE socialist move. Under a true Capatilist environment, the government would never step in to save a failing institution. We've already seen this happen in the early 80's for Chrysler, under socialist move where the government stepped in and helped out, and now with all of these banks and investment institutions failing we have the government stepping in again. Socialism is already here and has been for a while. You guys are just whining over nothing.
-
hmmm,...then at least please tell me you won't be voting for McCain either?
I don't like McCain (anymore). I'm not voting for him either.
-
You guys are so afraid of socialism but you obviously haven't been paying attention for the past 30 years, it's already here. The whole bail out plan is a PURE socialist move. Under a true Capatilist environment, the government would never step in to save a failing institution. We've already seen this happen in the early 80's for Chrysler, under socialist move where the government stepped in and helped out, and now with all of these banks and investment institutions failing we have the government stepping in again. Socialism is already here and has been for a while. You guys are just whining over nothing.
This is true.... but that doesn't mean I want to help it move further along.
-
I expect this story to hit the news in the next few days... If they don't by then they missed the target. I'm shocked it hasn't hit already.