Skip to comments.
'Disrobed': How Conservatives Can Take Back the Courts
Human Events Online ^
| Jun 22, 2006
| Lisa De Pasquale
Posted on 07/03/2006 12:43:31 PM PDT by DBeers
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-38 last
To: DBeers
Some of what he advocates is judicial activism, just not liberal judicial activism. I'm against this. We don't need activist judges - that's our current problem!
If activist judges are done away with (both left and right) conservatives win.
21
posted on
07/03/2006 5:43:06 PM PDT
by
Jaysun
(I'm from a little place called Smithereens. It ain't pretty out here.)
Comment #22 Removed by Moderator
To: DBeers
>>> How Conservatives Can Take Back the Courts <<<<
Start with taking back the colleges & K-12 schools
To: Valpal1
Many would agree with you.
24
posted on
07/03/2006 6:51:56 PM PDT
by
Dante3
To: ozoneliar
"Anybody else have a problem with this statement?"I sure do. A "conservative activist judge" is an activist judge all the same as a liberal activist judge. I prefer a judge who is an activist for the constitution, not some political ideology.
25
posted on
07/03/2006 6:56:54 PM PDT
by
KoRn
To: conservatism_IS_compassion
The Wall Street Journal carried a Letter to the Editor which argued that there should be an economist on the Supreme Court. I immediately thought, ". . . and I know just the person for that role - Thomas Sowell!"And then I looked at the byline of the letter. It was written by Thomas Sowell!!
Just think if Reagan had done that instead of naming Sandra Liberal O'Connor!
Deja Vu all over again. Thought that many times myself.
26
posted on
07/03/2006 7:01:44 PM PDT
by
Valpal1
(Big Media is like Barney Fife with a gun.)
To: DBeers
Bought the book. Its awesome.
27
posted on
07/03/2006 9:35:42 PM PDT
by
garbageseeker
(It's not the size of the dog in the fight, it's the size of the fight in the dog.”Samuel Clemmens)
To: seamole
Perhaps imprecision in my prior post needs to be clarified.
"There is no discussion of law review articles or citation to foreign law except that established before 1776."
And certainly, the intent of legislators in drafting law AFTER the Constitution was written may be relevant in interpreting ambiguity. But I do hold to the notion that the language is premier, and so if the plain meaning of the Constitutional language is clear, the historic nature or origin of the words is irrelevant and uninterpretable other than as drafted.
28
posted on
07/04/2006 12:58:01 AM PDT
by
LibertarianInExile
('Is' and 'amnesty' both have clear, plain meanings. Are Billy Jeff, Pence, McQueeg & Bush related?)
To: ozoneliar
["Also, I would love to see a conservative activist judge take over a failing school district and impose a school voucher program"
Anybody else have a problem with this statement?]
No, I don't.
29
posted on
07/04/2006 6:58:11 AM PDT
by
khnyny
(Never in the field of human conflict was so much owed by so many to so few.- Winston Churchill)
To: DBeers
Thanks for the ping on this one. I have this book, but haven't had a chance to read it yet! I think Disrobed should be required reading along with Mark Levin's "Men in Black".
30
posted on
07/04/2006 7:01:00 AM PDT
by
khnyny
(Never in the field of human conflict was so much owed by so many to so few.- Winston Churchill)
To: garbageseeker
The scary part is that judges are getting away with making the most outrageous decisions, blatantly violating their oath of office, and interfering into every aspect of our lives. Scores of judges have given a pass to dangerous pedophiles, one judge in Arizona even dictated the school budget and graduating requirements for the state, etc.
We have been moving towards a dictatorship of judges - a krytocracy, and in some parts of the country it is a reality. There is no excuse for letting them get away with it, but our elected officials are doing just that.
31
posted on
07/04/2006 7:09:39 AM PDT
by
Dante3
To: Jim Robinson
It seems to me that GW has let us down; Harriet Miers was an indicator that points to our disappointment. GW has not fought for his judicial nominees - until the SCOTUS nominees in his second term. Estrada withdrew his name - after being smeared mercilessly for four years: for what? His life ruined for nothing!
I understand there are a number of lower court nominees still languishing, and may continue to do so until Bush leaves office. That would be a real travesty.
If those postings go un-filled and a Dem is elected to the WH in two years [G*d forbid!!!], the courts will continue to be the greatest enemy of the Constitution.
Since Bush became Prez the SCOTUS has abridged the First Amend [CFR], the Fourth Amend [property rights] and now have abridged the Prez's ability to wage war... It isn't hard to see the rest of the Bill of Rights being ploughed under.
FReegards,
Bob I
32
posted on
07/04/2006 9:21:31 AM PDT
by
Bob Ireland
(The Democrat Party is a criminal enterprise)
To: Bob Ireland
I find it strange that President Bush has been so reluctant to fill court vacancies.
33
posted on
07/04/2006 9:34:41 AM PDT
by
Dante3
To: Bob Ireland
Well, I remember how hard we all worked to keep Al Gore and the corrupt Democrats from stealing the election in 2000 and how happy we were on Inauguration Day. And despite the disappointments with CFR, etc, I thank God every day that Bush was president on 9/11 and not Gore. And then all that had to be repeated in 2004. Thank God the treasonous John Kerry was blocked from stealing that election. And thank God that neither Gore or Kerry are appointing our judges today. I see it as one of the most important things we can do this November for ourselves and our posterity is to give the president an even greater majority in the Senate so he can continue replacing liberal activists with constitutionalists in the courts. Especially since there may be at least one more opening on the SCOTUS before Bush's term is up. If we get another like Roberts or Alito on the bench, we'll begin seeing a lot more of those 5 to 4 decisions going our way for a change. Hang in there, Bob. Purging the liberal activists from the judiciary is the key to winning this 100 year war against the socialists and that's why the Democrats and RINOs are working overtime at being fat-assed obstructionists. We've got them on the run. Don't go wobbly on us now.
Hope you're having a great Independence Day!!
To: Jim Robinson
***Don't go wobbly on us now***
You have put your finger on the challenge; after so many years of voting - right up to where I am now in the majority - I still have no representation in D.C. When a conservative does stand up - like Delay - they are destroyed by the commies and our side cowers in the corner slavering all over themselves in abject fear.
...then, here in Fla, they have pretty much disenfranchised me. This state is run by Repubs, yet they gerrymandered me out of west Orlando [where I live] and put me into West Jacksonville, where I don't even know the area code. My state and federal reps are all Dem communists who could care less if I drop dead... and I am overwhelmingly out-voted by the dumbest people in America.
So my vote only counts for U.S. Senate and Prez...
Still, you are right: all we can do is hang in there and keep bailing out the ocean... maybe someday my prince will come! ;-)
35
posted on
07/05/2006 9:48:09 AM PDT
by
Bob Ireland
(The Democrat Party is a criminal enterprise)
To: garbageseeker
Bought the book. Its awesome. I recently saw the author interviewed on C-SPAN and it sounded like a good book with good advice...
36
posted on
07/05/2006 7:16:40 PM PDT
by
DBeers
(†)
To: DBeers
I strongly urge you and anyone out there to purchase the book. It is a blueprint to take back our country and give the liberals a taste of their own medicine.
37
posted on
07/05/2006 7:44:50 PM PDT
by
garbageseeker
(It's not the size of the dog in the fight, it's the size of the fight in the dog.”Samuel Clemmens)
To: ozoneliar
There's where you separate the old-school political conservatives from the socially conservative political opportunists.
38
posted on
07/05/2006 7:53:49 PM PDT
by
tacticalogic
("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-38 last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson