| Topic: |
Politics > Politics-USA |
| User: |
"ouroboros rex" |
| Date: |
21 Jul 2005 09:28:41 AM |
| Object: |
The REAL story on Roberts is out |
Here are some of the areas of greatest concern from Roberts' record:
As a partisan lawyer for the Bush Sr. and Reagan administrations, Roberts
threatened:
Civil rights by asking the Supreme Court to severely limit the ability of
district courts to desegregate public schools (1), and working to ensure the
Voting Rights Act could not be used to remedy many cases of actual
discrimination against minority votes. 2
Women's rights by fighting for a law barring doctors from even discussing
reproductive options in many cases,3 and arguing that Roe. vs. Wade should
be "overruled." 4
Free speech by arguing to the Supreme Court that political speech that some
considered offensive did not deserve First Amendment protections. The Court
rejected his claim. 5
Religious liberty by arguing to the Supreme Court that public schools could
force religious speech on students. Again, the Court rejected the argument.
6
As a corporate lawyer, Roberts threatened:
Community and environmental rights by working to strike down new clean-air
rules and filing a brief for the National Mining Association, arguing that
federal courts could not stop mountaintop-removal mining in West Virginia,
even as it devastated local communities. 7
Workers' rights by helping Toyota to successfully evade the Americans with
Disabilities Act and fire workers for disabilities they suffered over time
because of the requirements of their jobs. 8
Public interest regulations by helping Fox News challenge FCC rules that
prevented the creation of news media monopolies. 9
In his short two years as a judge, Roberts has threatened:
Individual rights by rejecting the civil rights claims brought on behalf of
a 12-year-old girl who had been handcuffed, arrested and taken away by the
police for eating a single french fry in the D.C. Metro. 10
Environmental protections when the dissent he wrote on an Endangered Species
Act case, had it been in the majority, would have struck the Act down as
unconstitutional in many cases, and would have threatened a wide swath of
workplace, public safety and civil rights protections. 11
Human Rights by voting to strike down the Geneva Conventions as applied to
prisoners that the Bush administration chose to exempt from international
law. 12
Roberts' confirmation is not inevitable. As Senate Minority Leader Harry
Reid said yesterday, "The President has made his choice. Now the Senate will
do its job of deciding whether to confirm John Roberts to a lifetime seat on
the Supreme Court."
Now it's time for us all to do our job of telling our senators that our
rights are not negotiable, and John Roberts does not belong on the Supreme
Court.
Sources:
1. Oklahoma City Public Schools v. Dowell
2. Alliance for Justice, Nominee Profile
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=794
3. Alliance for Justice, Nominee Profile
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=794
4. "Same Appeal; Different Styles," Washington Postm July 17, 2005
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=795
5. United States v. Eichman, 496 U.S. 310 (1990)
6. Lee v. Weisman, 505 U.S. 577 (1992)
7. "The Making of the Corporate Judiciary" Mother Jones, November/December
2003
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=796
8. Toyota Motor Mfg., Kentucky v. Williams, 534 U.S. 184 (2002)
9. Alliance for Justice
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=797
10. Hedgepeth v. Wash. Metro. Area Transit Auth., 386 F.3d 1148 (D.C. Cir.
2004)
11. Rancho Viejo, LLC v. Norton, 334 F.3d 1158 (D.C. Cir. 2003 cert. denied)
12. Court: U.S. May Resume Detainee Tribunals, Associated Press, July 16th
2005
.
|
|
| User: "Bert Hyman" |
|
| Title: Re: The REAL story on Roberts is out |
21 Jul 2005 09:35:34 AM |
|
|
(ouroboros rex) wrote in
news:dbobep$i1t$1@news.ks.uiuc.edu:
As a partisan lawyer for the Bush Sr. and Reagan administrations,
Roberts threatened:
...
As a corporate lawyer, Roberts threatened:
...
In his short two years as a judge, Roberts has threatened:
...
I wasn't aware that a lawyer could "threaten" anything, but could
only argue his client's case before the court.
And just how does a judge threaten anything?
You have a strange idea of how the legal system works, if you have
any idea at all.
--
Bert Hyman | St. Paul, MN |
.
|
|
|
| User: "ouroboros rex" |
|
| Title: Re: The REAL story on Roberts is out |
21 Jul 2005 12:30:49 PM |
|
|
"Bert Hyman" <bert@iphouse.com> wrote in message
news:Xns969A61A676889VeebleFetzer@127.0.0.1...
c-bee1@itg.uiuc.edu (ouroboros rex) wrote in
news:dbobep$i1t$1@news.ks.uiuc.edu:
As a partisan lawyer for the Bush Sr. and Reagan administrations,
Roberts threatened:
...
As a corporate lawyer, Roberts threatened:
...
In his short two years as a judge, Roberts has threatened:
...
I wasn't aware that a lawyer could "threaten" anything, but could
only argue his client's case before the court.
And just how does a judge threaten anything?
You have a strange idea of how the legal system works, if you have
any idea at all.
More off-topic simpering from serial liar Bert Hyman. If you don't know
how the legal system can threaten anything, your brain is busted.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Wayne H. Wilhelm" |
|
| Title: Re: The REAL story on Roberts is out |
21 Jul 2005 02:10:19 PM |
|
|
"ouroboros rex" <c-bee1@itg.uiuc.edu> wrote in message
news:dbom49$lh5$1@news.ks.uiuc.edu...
"Bert Hyman" <bert@iphouse.com> wrote in message
news:Xns969A61A676889VeebleFetzer@127.0.0.1...
c-bee1@itg.uiuc.edu (ouroboros rex) wrote in
news:dbobep$i1t$1@news.ks.uiuc.edu:
As a partisan lawyer for the Bush Sr. and Reagan administrations,
Roberts threatened:
...
As a corporate lawyer, Roberts threatened:
...
In his short two years as a judge, Roberts has threatened:
...
I wasn't aware that a lawyer could "threaten" anything, but could
only argue his client's case before the court.
And just how does a judge threaten anything?
You have a strange idea of how the legal system works, if you have
any idea at all.
More off-topic simpering from serial liar Bert Hyman. If you don't know
how the legal system can threaten anything, your brain is busted.
Everyone knows that to a liberal, if someone has a different viewpoint,
they're:
(1) A liar
(2) Evil
(3) A threat
Proof?
During the 2000 Election attempt by Al Gore to change the vote results, the
Florida State Supreme court, comprised of all liberals except for one
independent, unanimously agreed to allow Al Gore to continue to try to
change the vote. Liberals said this was as it should be.
When the Federal Supreme Court countered stating you can't establish vote
results by changing the rules after the votes have been cast, the liberals
claimed Republicans were stealing the election.
To the Democrats, if a ruling is in their favor, it's proper. If a ruling
doesn't benefit them, it's theft.
The Democrats still insist that every vote counts, that they were only
trying to establish such. Wrong. Ohio had an even worse problem with those
ballots. The Democrats didn't life a finger to ensure every vote was
counted in Ohio (in 2000). Plus, due to faulty ballot design, Ohioans had
difficulty locating Bush's name at the bottom of a long list of names in
fine print. How many Ohioan's failed to vote for Bush in 2000 becuase they
couldn't find his name on the ballot? I had to scan the list twice before I
was able to spot Bush's name.
http://www.quadracalc.com/election2000/voting.rights.htm
Anybody who has ever played a game of poker knows you can't change the wild
card to that of cards in your hand after the cards have been dealt (after
the election).
For countless ages, children playing amongst themselves have a tendency to
occasionally yell, "Liar", "Cheater", "Thief", "Name-calling", etc. As the
children grow more mature, they tend to outgrow these childish tantrums.
For some odd reason, numerous posters in these newsgroups still use such
terms. (Yes, I've seen usage of such words by virtually every poster,
regardless of party affiliation.) I'm sure that on occasion I've allowed
the quality of my posts to be desecrated as well, by the usage of such
words. I doubt any of us have been completely immune to such heresy. In
the above link, I've been guilty of such. Over the past decade, I've been
trying to improve the quality of my writing by reducing such tendencies.
Take all of the posts you've ever made. Mark down the total.
Next, create two columns, one for "Debated well", the other, "Lost Debate".
For every post in which you accuse someone of being a liar, cheater, thief,
name-calling, etc., place a mark in the "Lost Debate" column.
In a real debate, such words aren't necessary. In a real debate, logic (I
know, there's that cuss word again) is all that is necessary to show whether
someone is a liar, cheater, thief, etc.. Those who are unable to show such
things without using such words lose their debate before it ever begins.
Sorry, I spent most of my life locked in a room full of computers. Majoring
in computer programming, computer logic has a tendency to prevail. No room
for emotion or emotional outbursts. Stem cell research along with genetic
engineering need to be utilized in such a manner as to enable the permanent
removal of human emotion.
-Wayne H. Wilhelm
Personal Web: http://www.quadracalc.com/thesage/
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bert Hyman" |
|
| Title: Re: The REAL story on Roberts is out |
21 Jul 2005 12:51:49 PM |
|
|
(ouroboros rex) wrote in
news:dbom49$lh5$1@news.ks.uiuc.edu:
"Bert Hyman" < > wrote in message
news:Xns969A61A676889VeebleFetzer@127.0.0.1...
(ouroboros rex) wrote in
news:dbobep$i1t$1@news.ks.uiuc.edu:
As a partisan lawyer for the Bush Sr. and Reagan administrations,
Roberts threatened:
...
As a corporate lawyer, Roberts threatened:
...
In his short two years as a judge, Roberts has threatened:
...
I wasn't aware that a lawyer could "threaten" anything, but could
only argue his client's case before the court.
And just how does a judge threaten anything?
You have a strange idea of how the legal system works, if you have
any idea at all.
More off-topic simpering from serial liar Bert Hyman. If you
don't know how the legal system can threaten anything, your brain
is busted.
Hmmm.... Suddenly you're talking about "the legal system", as opposed
to "attorney Roberts" or "judge Roberts".
Why is that?
--
Bert Hyman | St. Paul, MN |
.
|
|
|
| User: "ouroboros rex" |
|
| Title: Re: The REAL story on Roberts is out |
21 Jul 2005 01:55:39 PM |
|
|
"Bert Hyman" <bert@iphouse.com> wrote in message
news:Xns969A82EC663A3VeebleFetzer@127.0.0.1...
c-bee1@itg.uiuc.edu (ouroboros rex) wrote in
news:dbom49$lh5$1@news.ks.uiuc.edu:
"Bert Hyman" <bert@iphouse.com> wrote in message
news:Xns969A61A676889VeebleFetzer@127.0.0.1...
c-bee1@itg.uiuc.edu (ouroboros rex) wrote in
news:dbobep$i1t$1@news.ks.uiuc.edu:
As a partisan lawyer for the Bush Sr. and Reagan administrations,
Roberts threatened:
...
As a corporate lawyer, Roberts threatened:
...
In his short two years as a judge, Roberts has threatened:
...
I wasn't aware that a lawyer could "threaten" anything, but could
only argue his client's case before the court.
And just how does a judge threaten anything?
You have a strange idea of how the legal system works, if you have
any idea at all.
More off-topic simpering from serial liar Bert Hyman. If you
don't know how the legal system can threaten anything, your brain
is busted.
Hmmm.... Suddenly you're talking about "the legal system", as opposed
to "attorney Roberts" or "judge Roberts".
Why is that?
I just assumed a Supreme Court justice had a little control over the legal
system. roflmao
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bert Hyman" |
|
| Title: Re: The REAL story on Roberts is out |
21 Jul 2005 02:24:42 PM |
|
|
(ouroboros rex) wrote in
news:dbor3b$n56$1@news.ks.uiuc.edu:
"Bert Hyman" < > wrote in message
news:Xns969A82EC663A3VeebleFetzer@127.0.0.1...
(ouroboros rex) wrote in
news:dbom49$lh5$1@news.ks.uiuc.edu:
"Bert Hyman" < > wrote in message
news:Xns969A61A676889VeebleFetzer@127.0.0.1...
(ouroboros rex) wrote in
news:dbobep$i1t$1@news.ks.uiuc.edu:
As a partisan lawyer for the Bush Sr. and Reagan
administrations, Roberts threatened:
...
As a corporate lawyer, Roberts threatened:
...
In his short two years as a judge, Roberts has threatened:
...
I wasn't aware that a lawyer could "threaten" anything, but
could only argue his client's case before the court.
And just how does a judge threaten anything?
You have a strange idea of how the legal system works, if you
have any idea at all.
More off-topic simpering from serial liar Bert Hyman. If you
don't know how the legal system can threaten anything, your
brain is busted.
Hmmm.... Suddenly you're talking about "the legal system", as
opposed to "attorney Roberts" or "judge Roberts".
Why is that?
I just assumed a Supreme Court justice had a little control over
the legal system. roflmao
Your assumption ->is pretty damned funny.
But, get up off the floor and take your ***** with you.
--
Bert Hyman | St. Paul, MN |
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ryd" |
|
| Title: Re: The REAL story on Roberts is out |
21 Jul 2005 01:23:03 PM |
|
|
Bert Hyman wrote:
I wasn't aware that a lawyer could "threaten" anything, but could
only argue his client's case before the court.
And just how does a judge threaten anything?
You have a strange idea of how the legal system works, if you have
any idea at all.
Overboring Rex just picked up some talking points somewhere and
publishes them as his own.
He'll make up anything to kiss Democratic balls.
Ryd
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
