Should a 12 year old eating French fries on the Metro be a crime?

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

You decide.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/01/AR2005070102247.html?nav=rss_print/asection

[Jake]

You really love activist judges don't you? This is an example of following a law. This only makes him more qualified because he is willing to enforce a law that he doesn't agree with.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

You really love activist judges don't you? This is an example of following a law. This only makes him more qualified because he is willing to enforce a law that he doesn't agree with.

How do you feel about the following SCOTUS rulings?

1. Dred Scott
2. Santa Clara County vs. Southern Pacific
3. Bush vs. Gore

[MHS2002]

If you've ever been on the DC Metro, you would know that eating while on the trains is a big no-no and that the law is strictly enforced, to keep the trains clean. I suppose you want a judge unwilling to enforce the law then, no?

[Jake]

1. Dred Scott - Horrendous activist decision that badly hurt America
2. Santa Clara County vs. Southern Pacific - Your piss and moan case. I could care less.
3. Bush vs. Gore - A case unnecessary at the time that really only assured Bush became President a month earlier.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

1. Dred Scott - Horrendous activist decision that badly hurt America
2. Santa Clara County vs. Southern Pacific - Your piss and moan case. I could care less.
3. Bush vs. Gore - A case unnecessary at the time that really only assured Bush became President a month earlier.

2. So you don't care about some conservative activist rulings?
3. Say what?

[Jake]

I could care less about your pet case.

If the recounts were not ended, the electors would never have been appointed which would result in Gore receiving 267 EVs and Bush 244 EVs. Without a majority, the House would elect Bush President a month later in early January.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

I could care less about your pet case.

If the recounts were not ended, the electors would never have been appointed which would result in Gore receiving 267 EVs and Bush 244 EVs. Without a majority, the House would elect Bush President a month later in early January.

Actually, Florida was the first state to appoint its electors, long before the recount ended. Funny how Jeb Bush certifying a too close to call election while Pataki took his time cerifying Gore's 1.75 million vote margin of victory in NY.

[Nation]

When I did some interning over last summer, and everytime I went into DC for personal reasons, I take Metro.

When I see someone riding and eating, dropping food, stinking up the place, and messing up a train that already has TOO MANY problems -- yeah, arrest her. I don't care. She's not going to get some huge fine imposed on her. She's not going to jail. She'll be let go. It's making a point.

Don't eat on the goddamn train.

People are already rude enough in DC as it is.

Pick a different issue to disagree with Roberts on, jfern.

[Jake]

I'll echo MHS's and Nation's concerns about the Metro.

[Emsworth]

How do you feel about the following SCOTUS rulings?

1. Dred Scott
2. Santa Clara County vs. Southern Pacific
3. Bush vs. Gore

1. A clearly baseless and horrid decision, and one of the worst in the history of the Supreme Court.
2. ''
3. The equal protection portion was correct; the ruling that there was no remedy was dubious.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

How do you feel about the following SCOTUS rulings?

1. Dred Scott
2. Santa Clara County vs. Southern Pacific
3. Bush vs. Gore

1. A clearly baseless and horrid decision, and one of the worst in the history of the Supreme Court.
2. ''
3. The equal protection portion was correct; the ruling that there was no remedy was dubious.

At least you recognize that #2 is a conservative activist ruling. However, you seem to have bought into the equal protection bullsh**t that isn't really explained with Bush vs. Gore.

[Citizen James]

Not a lot of details given on the case.  Arrested and then what?
 If the result was a call to her parents and waiting for her to be picked up, that would be a reasonable result.

20 years in the slammer - that would be an inappropriate reponse.

[Jake]

I believe it is a fine if you eat on the metro.

[Defarge]

Is it really worth filibustering a nominee for this?

[ATFFL]

Is it really worth filibustering a nominee for this?

Please God, let Harry Reid's answer be yes. 

Can you say 65 Republican Senators in '06?  I knew you could.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Is it really worth filibustering a nominee for this?

Please God, let Harry Reid's answer be yes. 

Can you say 65 Republican Senators in '06?  I knew you could.

Please name 10 vulnerable Democratic seats.

[ATFFL]

Is it really worth filibustering a nominee for this?

Please God, let Harry Reid's answer be yes. 

Can you say 65 Republican Senators in '06?  I knew you could.

Please name 10 vulnerable Democratic seats.

If they blow their capital on stuff like this, all sorts of possibilities open up.

Plus, it is called comedic exaggeration.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Is it really worth filibustering a nominee for this?

Please God, let Harry Reid's answer be yes. 

Can you say 65 Republican Senators in '06?  I knew you could.

Please name 10 vulnerable Democratic seats.

If they blow their capital on stuff like this, all sorts of possibilities open up.

Plus, it is called comedic exaggeration.

But Bush can blow his capital on crazy right-wing SCOTUS appointees specifically timed to distract people from the Rove scandal. Double standard alert.

[ATFFL]

Is it really worth filibustering a nominee for this?

Please God, let Harry Reid's answer be yes. 

Can you say 65 Republican Senators in '06?  I knew you could.

Please name 10 vulnerable Democratic seats.

If they blow their capital on stuff like this, all sorts of possibilities open up.

Plus, it is called comedic exaggeration.

But Bush can blow his capital on crazy right-wing SCOTUS appointees specifically timed to distract people from the Rove scandal. Double standard alert.

If it were a right-wing nutjob, you might have a point.

Though the timing is defiitely meant to push Rove out of the news cyle.  That does not take any capital though.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Is it really worth filibustering a nominee for this?

Please God, let Harry Reid's answer be yes. 

Can you say 65 Republican Senators in '06?  I knew you could.

Please name 10 vulnerable Democratic seats.

If they blow their capital on stuff like this, all sorts of possibilities open up.

Plus, it is called comedic exaggeration.

But Bush can blow his capital on crazy right-wing SCOTUS appointees specifically timed to distract people from the Rove scandal. Double standard alert.

If it were a right-wing nutjob, you might have a point.

Though the timing is defiitely meant to push Rove out of the news cyle.  That does not take any capital though.

Well, I suppose you wouldn't agree that he's a nutjob, but in his short record he does have some rather extreme opinions. It obviously doesn't hellp my opinion of the situation that this plus all of the rumors placed (we need to start using the word placed instead of leaked) sucked out of the media coverage. The mainstream media can't cover more than 1 story at the same time. They seem rather feeble minded.

[ATFFL]

Well, I suppose you wouldn't agree that he's a nutjob, but in his short record he does have some rather extreme opinions. It obviously doesn't hellp my opinion of the situation that this plus all of the rumors placed (we need to start using the word placed instead of leaked) sucked out of the media coverage. The mainstream media can't cover more than 1 story at the same time. They seem rather feeble minded.

Agreed on the media.  Unless one of them is a hurricane.  They have all the weather experts to cover them.

[Q]

But does the average voter care what goes on in Congress?  The answer is pretty clearly no.

Look at the approval ratings of Congress - consistently less than 25% by most accounts.  And yet individual members of Congress receive high marks from their constituents, saying almost universally that they deserve to be re-elected.

Voters in a particular state are not going to vote for one party's candidate over the other because of some filibuster.  No Senator is going to lose because of it.  Most voters are already entrenched in their ways, and the filibuster issue or any other single issue will change no one's mind.

[J. J.]

It shouldn't be a crime, but it isn't an unconstitutional law.

I hope we don't enter the "Nanny mentality" where we think that the SCOTUS should determine what's "good" for us.

[John Dibble]

It shouldn't be a crime, but it isn't an unconstitutional law.

I hope we don't enter the "Nanny mentality" where we think that the SCOTUS should determine what's "good" for us.

^^^^