| Topic: |
Science > Abortion |
| User: |
"Frank Dwyer" |
| Date: |
04 Nov 2004 02:15:22 PM |
| Object: |
An actual on-topic post |
From:
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/11/04/specter.scotus.ap/index.html
The Republican expected to chair the Senate Judiciary Committee next
year bluntly warned newly re-elected President Bush on Wednesday against
putting forth Supreme Court nominees who would seek to overturn abortion
rights or are otherwise too conservative to win confirmation.
.
|
|
| User: "Johnny" |
|
| Title: Re: An actual on-topic post |
04 Nov 2004 03:13:05 PM |
|
|
"Frank Dwyer" <fdwyer@XcitlinkX.net> wrote in message
news:u5wid.1936$h93.1426@news02.roc.ny...
From:
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/11/04/specter.scotus.ap/index.html
The Republican expected to chair the Senate Judiciary Committee next year
bluntly warned newly re-elected President Bush on Wednesday against
putting forth Supreme Court nominees who would seek to overturn abortion
rights or are otherwise too conservative to win confirmation.
Since when does anyone other than the President get to nominate Supreme
Court Justices?
How does someone other than the President get to determine the reasons for
his nominations?
If nothing else, it could expose the men who are for abortion on demand and
clear up the Pro-Choice enigma once and for all.
Notice for all.
LOL!!!!!!
For all, just like in the pledge of allegiance, justices for all, instead of
justice for who we want to let have it.
GO GEORGE GO!!!!!!!!!!!!
We need real justice in the USA.
I wonder how much Planned Parenthood or NARAL paid Specter to say what he
said?
It would be interesting to see them interview Supreme Court nominees who are
smart enough to say that they are for the law as it is written.
Then they get confirmed. Then they overturn Roe VS. Wade because at that
point they are not being interviewed and their job has changed. And, they
did not lie. They were only saying that they are for the law as it is
written, not that they would not rewrite it.
LOL!!!!!!!
Hoodwinked in 1973.
Can it happen again?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mark Sebree" |
|
| Title: Re: An actual on-topic post |
05 Nov 2004 12:09:57 AM |
|
|
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message news:<0Xwid.21733$cS6.106@bignews6.bellsouth.net>...
"Frank Dwyer" <fdwyer@XcitlinkX.net> wrote in message
news:u5wid.1936$h93.1426@news02.roc.ny...
From:
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/11/04/specter.scotus.ap/index.html
The Republican expected to chair the Senate Judiciary Committee next year
bluntly warned newly re-elected President Bush on Wednesday against
putting forth Supreme Court nominees who would seek to overturn abortion
rights or are otherwise too conservative to win confirmation.
Since when does anyone other than the President get to nominate Supreme
Court Justices?
How does someone other than the President get to determine the reasons for
his nominations?
Because the Senate has the right and responsibility to determine if
the nominees to ALL federal benches are suitable for the job, and they
have the right and responsibility to turn down any nominee that they
deem unfit.
The President can nominate candidates, but the Senate confirms or
denies them. And the Senate Judicial Committee gets first crack at
and right of examination of those nominees. This is a check on the
Power of the President, as well as the Senate. The Senate cannot
present nominees to any federal bench, and there is no "rubber stamp"
for the President's nominees if the Senate is doing its job. This is
in the Constitution.
If nothing else, it could expose the men who are for abortion on demand and
clear up the Pro-Choice enigma once and for all.
And it would expose Bush as the narrow-minded and intolerant idiot
that many people already know that he is from his nominations for
judges to lower court benches.
Notice for all.
LOL!!!!!!
For all, just like in the pledge of allegiance, justices for all, instead of
justice for who we want to let have it.
And the nominees that George would prefer would not give it to us.
They would work to diminish and take away our rights and liberties.
GO GEORGE GO!!!!!!!!!!!!
Go and get out of the White House! (Too bad we could not get him
kicked out.)
We need real justice in the USA.
And the people that George would want to nominate would not give it to
us.
I wonder how much Planned Parenthood or NARAL paid Specter to say what he
said?
Nothing.
It would be interesting to see them interview Supreme Court nominees who are
smart enough to say that they are for the law as it is written.
It would be even more interesting if Bush actually nominates any,
instead of nominating those that want to rewrite the law.
Then they get confirmed. Then they overturn Roe VS. Wade because at that
point they are not being interviewed and their job has changed.
Like I said, rewrite the law.
And, they
did not lie. They were only saying that they are for the law as it is
written, not that they would not rewrite it.
If they overturn Roe vs. Wade, then they are ignoring legal precedent
and rewriting the law.
LOL!!!!!!!
Hoodwinked in 1973.
Not that I can see. You seem to be hoodwinked by the extreme
religious rights.
Can it happen again?
If Bush changes the balance on the Supreme Court, then the USA being
hoodwinked is very likely.
Mark Sebree
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Pr0r3p" |
|
| Title: Re: An actual on-topic post |
05 Nov 2004 11:10:24 AM |
|
|
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message news:<0Xwid.21733$cS6.106@bignews6.bellsouth.net>...
"Frank Dwyer" <fdwyer@XcitlinkX.net> wrote in message
news:u5wid.1936$h93.1426@news02.roc.ny...
From:
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/11/04/specter.scotus.ap/index.html
The Republican expected to chair the Senate Judiciary Committee next year
bluntly warned newly re-elected President Bush on Wednesday against
putting forth Supreme Court nominees who would seek to overturn abortion
rights or are otherwise too conservative to win confirmation.
Since when does anyone other than the President get to nominate Supreme
Court Justices?
How does someone other than the President get to determine the reasons for
his nominations?
Obviously, you've never heard of the Senate Judiciary Committee. It
looks like reality has escaped you AGAIN>
If nothing else, it could expose the men who are for abortion on demand and
clear up the Pro-Choice enigma once and for all.
Notice for all.
LOL!!!!!!
For all, just like in the pledge of allegiance, justices for all, instead of
justice for who we want to let have it.
GO GEORGE GO!!!!!!!!!!!!
We need real justice in the USA.
I wonder how much Planned Parenthood or NARAL paid Specter to say what he
said?
Obviously, you aren't familiar with Specter either, or you wouldn't
have made such an obviously STUPID accusation.
It would be interesting to see them interview Supreme Court nominees who are
smart enough to say that they are for the law as it is written.
Then they get confirmed. Then they overturn Roe VS. Wade because at that
point they are not being interviewed and their job has changed. And, they
did not lie. They were only saying that they are for the law as it is
written, not that they would not rewrite it.
Ahh, so you believe that personal beliefs rather than an
interpretation of our Constitution should determine the law of the
land? You truely are a fucking idiot.
LOL!!!!!!!
You'd better adjust your meds...
Hoodwinked in 1973.
Can it happen again?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Frank Dwyer" |
|
| Title: Re: An actual on-topic post |
04 Nov 2004 06:33:44 PM |
|
|
Johnny wrote:
"Frank Dwyer" <fdwyer@XcitlinkX.net> wrote in message
news:u5wid.1936$h93.1426@news02.roc.ny...
From:
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/11/04/specter.scotus.ap/index.html
The Republican expected to chair the Senate Judiciary Committee next year
bluntly warned newly re-elected President Bush on Wednesday against
putting forth Supreme Court nominees who would seek to overturn abortion
rights or are otherwise too conservative to win confirmation.
Since when does anyone other than the President get to nominate Supreme
Court Justices?
How does someone other than the President get to determine the reasons for
his nominations?
It's call the Senate Judiciary Committee. The President nominates a
candidate for the Supreme Court, and the SJC has to confirm him/her
before they're allowed to take the bench.
I'm sure Justice Thomas can tell you all about it.
If nothing else, it could expose the men who are for abortion on demand and
clear up the Pro-Choice enigma once and for all.
Notice for all.
LOL!!!!!!
For all, just like in the pledge of allegiance, justices for all, instead of
justice for who we want to let have it.
GO GEORGE GO!!!!!!!!!!!!
We need real justice in the USA.
I wonder how much Planned Parenthood or NARAL paid Specter to say what he
said?
They didn't have to. It's Specter's position.
It would be interesting to see them interview Supreme Court nominees who are
smart enough to say that they are for the law as it is written.
Then they get confirmed. Then they overturn Roe VS. Wade because at that
point they are not being interviewed and their job has changed. And, they
did not lie. They were only saying that they are for the law as it is
written, not that they would not rewrite it.
LOL!!!!!!!
Hoodwinked in 1973.
Can it happen again?
Wishful thinking on your part.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
