The time has come...

[riceowl]

slash that republican who said that about Clinton and Kosovo blahblahblah

nice try.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

This feels very bad because it seems like a lot of forum members have switched over to the Republicans. I remember when Emsworth used to be a Democrat, Alcon used to be a solid liberal. Now that's hard to imagine. The only one who has gone from Republican to Democrat is J-Mann. I wonder if there's something about this board that changes people?

There's Opebo. Also some other posters have gotten more liberal, like Smash.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yes this forum definitely has a bias in favor of right-wing activist judges. They all talk about how they're not activist blah blah blah, and then those justices do activist rulings like Bush vs. Gore.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

slash that republican who said that about Clinton and Kosovo blahblahblah

nice try.

So the person is said it is just "that Republican"?

[Jake]

We could be there 50 years. We've built permanent bases.

Yes, because what a tragedy it would've been to stay in Germany, Korea, and Japan for fifty years.

[riceowl]

I honestly don't remember who it was.  Bush, no?

[Beet]

This feels very bad because it seems like a lot of forum members have switched over to the Republicans. I remember when Emsworth used to be a Democrat, Alcon used to be a solid liberal. Now that's hard to imagine. The only one who has gone from Republican to Democrat is J-Mann. I wonder if there's something about this board that changes people?

There's Opebo. Also some other posters have gotten more liberal, like Smash.

Opebo? You're counting him? I count him as a loss. He represents -1.

Edit: I just noticed how fatalistic the title of this thread is ("the time has come..."), as if this moment was long expected subconsciously. That is creepy.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

We could be there 50 years. We've built permanent bases.

Yes, because what a tragedy it would've been to stay in Germany, Korea, and Japan for fifty years.

That analogy quickly falls apart.

[riceowl]

I didn't know you thought Bush was a crazy liberal.

How odd.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

I didn't know you thought Bush was a crazy liberal.

How odd.

Well, he was clearly being very critical of the President in a time of war, which makes him be a crazy liberal.

[nini2287]

But when I see people like nini citing this forum and him deciding to be an originalist as a factor in deciding his party id, it really is troubling, because I think any honest person will admit that we really do not have a balanced debate on this site when it comes to judicial philosophy, and I don't think nini is really being exposed to any counterarguments or responses coming from the other side. That is not nini's fault... anyone who listens to only one side over, and over, and over again will be convinced. That is the same way talk radio works. A18 and Emsworth are practically legal experts for their age, but they are only 17, and there are complicated intricacies to judicial philosophy that can't possibly come out on a message board.

You do have a point here, and while A18 and Emsworth have had a significant impact on my judicial views, I have received the other side of judicial arguments.  I really didn't follow the Supreme Court until this summer when I read Linda Greenhouse's book Becoming Justice Blackmun and while reading it I was outraged at how somebody of such authority manipulate the Constitution to fit their own personal viewpoints.  I have also  heard lectures on campus from judicial liberals and did not agree with many of their viewpoints (I'm also attending a debate in March between the Federalist Society and some liberal organization).

I've said in the past that I think a lot of the people on this site who have avatars ought to be independents.

And the moment PA (where I'm registered) opens up primaries to Independents, I'll be first line to become one.

Edit: I just noticed how fatalistic the title of this thread is ("the time has come..."), as if this moment was long expected subconsciously. That is creepy.

Given the direction of the Democratic party recently, I did sort of expect it may happen when I got angry enough.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Given the direction of the Democratic party recently, I did sort of expect it may happen when I got angry enough.

While only the most pathetic Democratic apolgist would claim that there are no problems with the direction of the Democratic party, it's clear that the Republican party has many more problems. But if you want to be part of the party that thinks that it's more important to save a brain-damaged white woman in a coma's life than hundreds of New Orleans blacks, then good riddance.

[nini2287]

Given the direction of the Democratic party recently, I did sort of expect it may happen when I got angry enough.

While only the most pathetic Democratic apolgist would claim that there are no problems with the direction of the Democratic party, it's clear that the Republican party has many more problems. But if you want to be part of the party that thinks that it's more important to save a brain-damaged white woman in a coma's life than hundreds of New Orleans blacks, then good riddance.

Whose fault is that?

Even Bill Frist (whom I dislike as a politican) did pro bono medical relief work for hurricane victims while Mary Landrieu (whom I like as a politican) sat there whining.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Hint:

You can pick the person most at fault out of this lineup.

[riceowl]

I didn't hear anyone blaming Al Gore.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

I didn't hear anyone blaming Al Gore.

It's clearly his fault for quitely volunteering while Bush was trying to shut Louisiana down for his staged photo ops.

[nini2287]

And how could Bush have saved their lives?

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

And how could Bush have saved their lives?

Done a better job at preparing for the damn thing. FEMA had warned in early 2001 (before Bush had gutted the organization) that the most likely major disaster to hit the US would be a direct hit of a hurricane on New Orleans. We were lucky, New Orleans wasn't directly hit. It could have been a lot worse.  However, Bush had cut levee spending.

BTW, the other 2 disasters mentioned by FEMA were NYC terrorist attack and SF earthquake. I guess San Francisco is on its own when the earthquake hits, because the Bush adminstration sucks ass at protecting America.

[Beet]

But when I see people like nini citing this forum and him deciding to be an originalist as a factor in deciding his party id, it really is troubling, because I think any honest person will admit that we really do not have a balanced debate on this site when it comes to judicial philosophy, and I don't think nini is really being exposed to any counterarguments or responses coming from the other side. That is not nini's fault... anyone who listens to only one side over, and over, and over again will be convinced. That is the same way talk radio works. A18 and Emsworth are practically legal experts for their age, but they are only 17, and there are complicated intricacies to judicial philosophy that can't possibly come out on a message board.

You do have a point here, and while A18 and Emsworth have had a significant impact on my judicial views, I have received the other side of judicial arguments.  I really didn't follow the Supreme Court until this summer when I read Linda Greenhouse's book Becoming Justice Blackmun and while reading it I was outraged at how somebody of such authority manipulate the Constitution to fit their own personal viewpoints.  I have also  heard lectures on campus from judicial liberals and did not agree with many of their viewpoints (I'm also attending a debate in March between the Federalist Society and some liberal organization).

Well this is the spirit of the times, nini. I don't know much about the history of jurisprudence but I suspect that much. In the early part of the last century when legal realism was coming into its own, it must have held the upper, more critical, hand, while a tide of renewed interest in textualism has come with the conservative tide of the late 20th century. Until things change in general, there will be probably many more like you.

The only thing I can say is that I believe the differences of the two political parties on the judicial question divide not inherently on lines of differences in judicial philosophy but spring at the root from the differing outcomes that these differences would produce. This is what you would expect in a discussion of politics in relation to law, as opposed to the study of law in and of itself.

[nini2287]

But when I see people like nini citing this forum and him deciding to be an originalist as a factor in deciding his party id, it really is troubling, because I think any honest person will admit that we really do not have a balanced debate on this site when it comes to judicial philosophy, and I don't think nini is really being exposed to any counterarguments or responses coming from the other side. That is not nini's fault... anyone who listens to only one side over, and over, and over again will be convinced. That is the same way talk radio works. A18 and Emsworth are practically legal experts for their age, but they are only 17, and there are complicated intricacies to judicial philosophy that can't possibly come out on a message board.

You do have a point here, and while A18 and Emsworth have had a significant impact on my judicial views, I have received the other side of judicial arguments.  I really didn't follow the Supreme Court until this summer when I read Linda Greenhouse's book Becoming Justice Blackmun and while reading it I was outraged at how somebody of such authority manipulate the Constitution to fit their own personal viewpoints.  I have also  heard lectures on campus from judicial liberals and did not agree with many of their viewpoints (I'm also attending a debate in March between the Federalist Society and some liberal organization).

The only thing I can say is that I believe the differences of the two political parties on the judicial question divide not inherently on lines of differences in judicial philosophy but spring at the root from the differing outcomes that these differences would produce.and of itself.

That is most likely unfortunetly correct, however, I do believe there are a few within the Republican Party who are legitimately concerned with protecting the judiciary (notably Clarence Thomas) and I hope that number is growing, not shrinking.

And jfern, while Bush didn't do an optimal job handling the hurricane, are you really saying the Democrats did a good job?

[ian]

This feels very bad because it seems like a lot of forum members have switched over to the Republicans. I remember when Emsworth used to be a Democrat, Alcon used to be a solid liberal. Now that's hard to imagine. The only one who has gone from Republican to Democrat is J-Mann. I wonder if there's something about this board that changes people?

Regarding judicial issues, I really wish migrendel still posted here. I'll be the first to admit that my interest in judicial philosophy would be limited to constitutional cases that have a substantial impact on outcomes, and stem mostly from how it affects outcomes. I simply don't want to fall into the dishonest trap of trying to argue legal interpretation from politically motivated ends.

But when I see people like nini citing this forum and him deciding to be an originalist as a factor in deciding his party id, it really is troubling, because I think any honest person will admit that we really do not have a balanced debate on this site when it comes to judicial philosophy, and I don't think nini is really being exposed to any counterarguments or responses coming from the other side. That is not nini's fault... anyone who listens to only one side over, and over, and over again will be convinced. That is the same way talk radio works. A18 and Emsworth are practically legal experts for their age, but they are only 17, and there are complicated intricacies to judicial philosophy that can't possibly come out on a message board.

Further, it seems like there is a huge cache of people just hanging over the percipice (sp): Frodo, Virginian87, Ebowed, etc. etc. These tend to be some of the most solid and interesting posters. However, when I see a post by one of them it's generally more often than not in favor of some conservative position or denouncing some Democrat. I've said in the past that I think a lot of the people on this site who have avatars ought to be independents. Yet (as might be expected for the politically motivated), the adoption of a political party seems quite necessary. Every day I half expect a post from one of those guys saying "Hey everyone I'm a Republican now"

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Ian's favorite poster of the week: Beet.

[riceowl]

But if you want to be part of the party that thinks that it's more important to save a brain-damaged white woman in a coma's life than hundreds of New Orleans blacks, then good riddance.

You are aware that a disproportionately high number of white people died in Katrina compared to blacks, right?

[riceowl]

...aren't you?

[Ebowed]

Further, it seems like there is a huge cache of people just hanging over the percipice (sp): Frodo, Virginian87, Ebowed, etc. etc. These tend to be some of the most solid and interesting posters. However, when I see a post by one of them it's generally more often than not in favor of some conservative position or denouncing some Democrat.

I'm more of a Democrat than I let on.  I just don't talk about my liberal positions as much as my positions that aren't in line with the party.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Further, it seems like there is a huge cache of people just hanging over the percipice (sp): Frodo, Virginian87, Ebowed, etc. etc. These tend to be some of the most solid and interesting posters. However, when I see a post by one of them it's generally more often than not in favor of some conservative position or denouncing some Democrat.

I'm more of a Democrat than I let on.  I just don't talk about my liberal positions as much as my positions that aren't in line with the party.

Yes, anti-abortionists like you are welcome in the big tent Democratic party.

[Cubby]

This is terrible.  I blame people like jfern, Pym, and progress for scaring good people like you off.

jfern its sad that you're alone in this thread promoting the liberal point of view. There's like 6 liberals around here and 417 libertarian centrists.

Judicial integrity is the worst euphimism I've ever heard.

Judicial integrity= I hate fags and disagree with Lawrence v. Texas

Thats what it really means, I don't care how much you oppose the GOP on this issue, there was zero interest in "judicial integrity" until the day that decision was announced.

I'm not a Reagan worshiper

hahahahaha! you worship at his shrine every day (all Republicans do). In your mind the Soviet Union was a strong economic superpower in 1980 until Noble Cowboy Reagan came along and put those bad commies in their place by scaring them with his defense buildup.

Whose fault is that?

Congratulations Nini, you are already using the National Review to back up your arguement, as all fundament....I mean Republicans do (that photo was on their cover right after Katrina). Blame Ray Nagin for failing when the federal gov't was on vacation, thats the conservative way!