| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Omar Little
Moderator
Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 90306
Location: Formerly Known As 24
|
 Posted: Tue Nov 25, 2014 5:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | 24 wrote: | | They are one short. |
It's not that simple. The media greatly oversimplifies the split on the Supreme Court. In order to get the votes to do something as dramatic as overturning Establishment Clause jurisprudence, the GOP would need to replace 2-3 of the liberals/moderates with Clarence Thomas clones. |
I don't see that as true at all. Roberts, Scalia, Thomas, and Alito tend to vote as a block on such issues. As they were hand picked to do.
_________________
“We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” ― Elie Wiesel |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
ContagiousInspiration
Franchise Player
Joined: 07 May 2014
Posts: 13823
Location: Boulder ;)
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 25, 2014 5:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Were the people who orchestrated the Trail of Tears Christians?
I remember in one of my courses that Manifest Destiny led the Christians to Colonize, Civilize and Christianize the Native Americans.
Many of the acts Christians think Jesus would have approved of really are not acts we want our current generation to replicate -IMHO. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 25, 2014 7:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| 24 wrote: | | I don't see that as true at all. Roberts, Scalia, Thomas, and Alito tend to vote as a block on such issues. As they were hand picked to do. |
They do often vote as a bloc, though not as much as you think. But that isn't what I meant. The Supreme Court is inherently conservative (in the non-political sense) when it comes to overturning precedent. I'm not talking about staid concepts like stare decisis, either. I mean that the justices on the Supreme Court are historically reluctant to make vast changes in the law just because they have a 5-4 majority. Now, if it got to be 6-3 or 7-2 with a couple extra ideologues like Thomas, then it's a different ballgame. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tlim
Star Player
Joined: 26 Jun 2002
Posts: 6649
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 25, 2014 10:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Wilt wrote: | | The 72 virgins thing is not from the Quran, but from Hadith. Virgins are mentioned in the Quran in the context of paradise (not just for martyrs, but for everybody), but not the number 72. |
Thank you for informing me of my ignorance in that matter.
The part about the trinity still holds true. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Omar Little
Moderator
Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 90306
Location: Formerly Known As 24
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 25, 2014 10:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | 24 wrote: | | I don't see that as true at all. Roberts, Scalia, Thomas, and Alito tend to vote as a block on such issues. As they were hand picked to do. |
They do often vote as a bloc, though not as much as you think. But that isn't what I meant. The Supreme Court is inherently conservative (in the non-political sense) when it comes to overturning precedent. I'm not talking about staid concepts like stare decisis, either. I mean that the justices on the Supreme Court are historically reluctant to make vast changes in the law just because they have a 5-4 majority. Now, if it got to be 6-3 or 7-2 with a couple extra ideologues like Thomas, then it's a different ballgame. |
Fair enough. I think this bloc has been quite activist.
_________________
“We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” ― Elie Wiesel |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 26, 2014 7:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
Interesting. I expected more opposition to the substance, but I'm not surprised by the opposition to the method.
| Quote: | Only 26% of Americans think Obama's plan for those immigrants goes too far, while 50% called it about right and 22% said it doesn't go far enough, according to a CNN/ORC poll out Wednesday of 1,045 adults, conducted Nov. 21-23 and with a margin of error of plus or minus 3 percentage points.
However, when asked for their stance on Obama using an executive order to make those changes, just 41% said they favor the move, while 56% said they oppose it. |
| Quote: | Just 16% of Americans are angry about Obama's immigration move -- though another 27% said they are displeased. Nearly one-quarter of Americans say it doesn't matter, and 41% say they're pleased or enthusiastic about it.
Support for a GOP lawsuit against Obama over his executive order comes from just 38% of Americans, while 60% say Republicans shouldn't challenge the move in court.
Instead, 76% said the GOP should spend more time passing immigration reform legislation -- something Obama repeatedly prodded his Republican critics, especially in the House, to do -- while just 21% said the party should focus on overturning Obama's policies. |
http://www.cnn.com/2014/11/26/politics/cnn-immigration-poll/index.html?hpt=hp_t3 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 144462
Location: The Gold Coast
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 26, 2014 11:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
Anyone want the Secretary of Defense job? It seems there are few who are interested.
_________________
RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KobeBryantCliffordBrown
Star Player
Joined: 28 Apr 2008
Posts: 6429
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 27, 2014 2:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | 24 wrote: | | I don't see that as true at all. Roberts, Scalia, Thomas, and Alito tend to vote as a block on such issues. As they were hand picked to do. |
They do often vote as a bloc, though not as much as you think. But that isn't what I meant. The Supreme Court is inherently conservative (in the non-political sense) when it comes to overturning precedent. I'm not talking about staid concepts like stare decisis, either. I mean that the justices on the Supreme Court are historically reluctant to make vast changes in the law just because they have a 5-4 majority. Now, if it got to be 6-3 or 7-2 with a couple extra ideologues like Thomas, then it's a different ballgame. |
This Court doesn't seem to have anywhere close to the restraint of a Felix Frankfurter court. Their gutting of The Civil Rights Act pretty much sums up their attitude and MO.
_________________
“It took many years of vomiting up all the filth I’d been taught about myself, and half-believed, before I was able to walk on the earth as though I had a right to be here.”
― James Baldwin, Collected Essays |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KobeBryantCliffordBrown
Star Player
Joined: 28 Apr 2008
Posts: 6429
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 27, 2014 2:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Aeneas Hunter wrote: | Interesting. I expected more opposition to the substance, but I'm not surprised by the opposition to the method.
| Quote: | Only 26% of Americans think Obama's plan for those immigrants goes too far, while 50% called it about right and 22% said it doesn't go far enough, according to a CNN/ORC poll out Wednesday of 1,045 adults, conducted Nov. 21-23 and with a margin of error of plus or minus 3 percentage points.
However, when asked for their stance on Obama using an executive order to make those changes, just 41% said they favor the move, while 56% said they oppose it. |
| Quote: | Just 16% of Americans are angry about Obama's immigration move -- though another 27% said they are displeased. Nearly one-quarter of Americans say it doesn't matter, and 41% say they're pleased or enthusiastic about it.
Support for a GOP lawsuit against Obama over his executive order comes from just 38% of Americans, while 60% say Republicans shouldn't challenge the move in court.
Instead, 76% said the GOP should spend more time passing immigration reform legislation -- something Obama repeatedly prodded his Republican critics, especially in the House, to do -- while just 21% said the party should focus on overturning Obama's policies. |
http://www.cnn.com/2014/11/26/politics/cnn-immigration-poll/index.html?hpt=hp_t3 |
Goes to show that Obama's flaw as a POTUS is allowing the other side define the terms. He should have been on the Republicans on the regular regarding their obstructionist ways and his rhetoric should have been a little less lofty, a little more combative.
_________________
“It took many years of vomiting up all the filth I’d been taught about myself, and half-believed, before I was able to walk on the earth as though I had a right to be here.”
― James Baldwin, Collected Essays |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 27, 2014 8:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
| KobeBryantCliffordBrown wrote: | | Goes to show that Obama's flaw as a POTUS is allowing the other side define the terms. He should have been on the Republicans on the regular regarding their obstructionist ways and his rhetoric should have been a little less lofty, a little more combative. |
He has not been the great communicator, for sure. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 27, 2014 8:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
| KobeBryantCliffordBrown wrote: | | This Court doesn't seem to have anywhere close to the restraint of a Felix Frankfurter court. Their gutting of The Civil Rights Act pretty much sums up their attitude and MO. |
I was outraged by that decision, but at the same time it was a statutory issue. To date, the Court hasn't overruled much of anything in the way of constitutional precedent. The major exception that jumps to mind was the Second Amendment case, but honestly the precedent that got overruled was weak. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KobeBryantCliffordBrown
Star Player
Joined: 28 Apr 2008
Posts: 6429
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 27, 2014 2:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | KobeBryantCliffordBrown wrote: | | This Court doesn't seem to have anywhere close to the restraint of a Felix Frankfurter court. Their gutting of The Civil Rights Act pretty much sums up their attitude and MO. |
I was outraged by that decision, but at the same time it was a statutory issue. To date, the Court hasn't overruled much of anything in the way of constitutional precedent. The major exception that jumps to mind was the Second Amendment case, but honestly the precedent that got overruled was weak. |
Can you explain the difference just for clarification. Also, I think I have a general idea and don't follow the court as closely as I used to. What is the approximate proportion of the two such cases that they rule upon.
_________________
“It took many years of vomiting up all the filth I’d been taught about myself, and half-believed, before I was able to walk on the earth as though I had a right to be here.”
― James Baldwin, Collected Essays |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 27, 2014 4:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Probably 80% statutory, though some of the statutory cases have some sort of constitutional issue in the mix. Here is a list of all of the cases that are currently pending before the Supreme Court (with review granted):
http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/terms/ot2014/?sort=mname
Here is a breakdown of voting patterns from last term, if anyone is interested:
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/06/24/upshot/24up-scotus-agreement-rates.html?abt=0002&abg=0
The overall patterns are fairly predictable, but it will surprise a lot of people to see that the most extreme of the justices -- Ginsburg and Thomas -- still vote together two thirds of the time. The splits are usually not as predictable as the media would have you believe. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
C M B
Franchise Player
Joined: 15 Nov 2006
Posts: 19865
Location: Prarie & Manchester, high above the western sideline
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ContagiousInspiration
Franchise Player
Joined: 07 May 2014
Posts: 13823
Location: Boulder ;)
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 09, 2014 5:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| C M B wrote: | | http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2014/12/harry-reid-mitch-mcconnell-budget-bill-rider-campaign-finance |
For the people by the people
Us peoples need must make all riders illegal.. Yes, illegal as in a violation of the law not just some sort of political infraction.
Pork in a bill is treason and absolutely heinous display of a lack of integrity in our system. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ContagiousInspiration
Franchise Player
Joined: 07 May 2014
Posts: 13823
Location: Boulder ;)
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 09, 2014 5:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Torture "(bleep) Yea!"
Am I understanding this right.. Republicans see the report as hating the military vs Democrats see it as a safeguard of our nations ideals and democracy? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 10, 2014 3:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The lines aren't drawn that clearly on partisan lines, but yes, that is generally accurate. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ContagiousInspiration
Franchise Player
Joined: 07 May 2014
Posts: 13823
Location: Boulder ;)
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 11, 2014 5:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| If they shutdown the government again can Americans sue them for dereliction of duty? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 11, 2014 6:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Can someone sue the American voters for electing this crowd? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rwongega
Franchise Player
Joined: 20 Jul 2005
Posts: 20510
Location: UCLA -> NY
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ContagiousInspiration
Franchise Player
Joined: 07 May 2014
Posts: 13823
Location: Boulder ;)
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 12, 2014 8:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
CIA 'enhanced interrogation' paid off well for shrinks
http://m.nydailynews.com/news/politics/cia-enhanced-interrogation-paid-shrinks-article-1.2039928
The Senate report released Tuesday on the secret anti-terrorist program notes that the CIA contracted with two psychologists to assist with interrogation of detainees based on their theories of "learned helplessness."
It says that the two formed a company in 2005 specifically to conduct their work with the CIA, which proceeded to outsource most aspects of the program to them as part of a potential $180 million contract.
The two contractors who helped with the interrogation methods are identified under the pseudonyms Grayson Swigert and Hammond Dunbar but are known to be Dr. John Jessen and Dr. James Mitchell, who run a Spokane, Wash., company.
The two men started with a $1,000-a-day tax-free retainer and ultimately signed a huge contract whose total value was "in excess of $180 million," according to the Senate report.
It was terminated in 2009 but not before they'd been paid $81 million. They were then provided a multi-year indemnification agreement as the program's existence became widely known
***********************
While NY COPS choke people to death for selling duty free cigarettes... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jodeke
Retired Number
Joined: 17 Nov 2007
Posts: 67631
Location: In a world where admitting to not knowing something is considered a great way to learn.
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 12, 2014 9:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
The Simple Truth: President Obama is Too Intelligent for Republicans to Understand
LINK
| Quote: | | Which brings me to President Obama. While I’m not calling him a genius, I do think he’s extremely intelligent. I also believe that his tendency to use “big picture” thinking while drafting policy is something most Republican voters simply can’t understand. |
_________________
Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind.
America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mhan00
Retired Number
Joined: 13 Apr 2001
Posts: 32059
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 12, 2014 4:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Is Putin trying to start WWIII? The oil prices and economic sanctions are playing havoc on Russia's economy, and I'm a little concerned all this posturing by Putin is a precursor to him going down swinging and bringing down the rest of the world with him. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 12, 2014 4:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The worrisome historical precedent is Japan in 1941. I'm not that worried, though. What is he really going to do? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jodeke
Retired Number
Joined: 17 Nov 2007
Posts: 67631
Location: In a world where admitting to not knowing something is considered a great way to learn.
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 17, 2014 3:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
What will the ramifications of the Cuban embargo be if it's lifted?
IMM there will be a boost of the Cuban economy and allow Cuban Americans the freedom to travel "home" to visit family and friends without fear.
I don't know, other than sugar and tabacco, what Cuba has to offer as far as exports are concerened.
_________________
Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind.
America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.
Last edited by jodeke on Wed Dec 17, 2014 3:39 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
