Posted on 12/15/2007 7:14:36 AM PST by BarnacleCenturion
Shmuckleberry is kind of like a Bush without marbles in his mouth.
At this point I am supporting Hunter, and could hold my nose a bit and vote for Fred. Other than that, the field is barren. I’d sooner vote for Paul than a Huckleberry, Rommey, or Giuliani ticket. At least we know he’d be a consistent veto against those who would destroy the constitution!
Well while you’re being a purist and helping Huckabee run away with this thing, you might want to listen to Alan Keyes. Sure he drinks too much coffee, but he did a great job on Hannity the other day exposing ideological flaws in all the candidates including Fred McCain and St. Duncan. You should be supporting Keyes if all you care about is your ideals.
A judge who twists the clear meaning of the Second Amendment and thinks portions of the Constitution can be treated as if they didn't exist deserves contempt and scorn. Thank goodness he's not going to be deciding on the upcoming Heller/Parker case. Bork on the Second Amendment:
The Second Amendment states somewhat ambiguously: "A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
The first part of the Amendment supports proponents of gun control by seeming to make the possession of firearms contingent upon being a member of a state-regulated militia.
The next part is cited by opponents of gun control as a guarantee of the individual's right to possess such weapons, since he can always be called to militia service.
The Supreme Court has consistently ruled that there is no individual right to own a firearm. The Second Amendment was designed to allow states to defend themselves against a possible tyrannical national government.
Now that the federal government has stealth bombers and nuclear weapons, it is hard to imagine what people would need to keep in the garage to serve that purpose.
-- footnote Slouching Towards Gomorrah
Bork also says that the Privileges or Immunities Clause is "inscrutable and should be treated as if it had been obliterated by an ink blot".
--Bork, The Tempting of America 166
That is a good point about President Reagan that I did not even think of. Plus didn’t Romney decide later that he does support 2nd Amendment now?
“Is Mitt picks up endorsments and momentum, the bashers look more and more like the silly little nutcases they are.”
Exactly. No matter how distingished a conservative the endorser is, these anti-Romney-bots find a reason suddenly to declare the endorser “not a true conservative.” If God endorsed Romney, they’d explain that God really doesn’t know what He’s doing, His brain is addled, He’s really a flip-flopper, He’s being paid off by the Tri-Lateral-Commission, or is really in the employ of the Demoncrats.
Some of you folks need to wake up and recognize how the process works. Julieannie is simply not acceptable to conservatives. It’s a stop Julieannie issue. Hunter and Tancredo can’t do it. Huckabee is a joke but before it’s too late has to be exposed as the joke he is. The calculus for conservatives is now between Thompson and Romney and folks like Bork and NRO and Buckley and an increasingly long list are simply saying, look, of the two, in terms of electability and positions on key issues, Romney wins.
Disagree on the merits—explain why Thompson is superior on merits, but when you respond simply ad hominem toward the endorser and toward Romney, you discredit yourselves as politically unreal.
“wonder if these folks realize just how they really look? A lot of these endorsements are from well established conservatives who have been bastians of conservative thought for decades.”
BULL
Bork was never a friend of liberty.
I draw the line at my right to keep and bear arms - Bork doesn’t think it exists.
“We’ve counted on these conservatives for years & appreciated their wisdom & their fight. “
Many have NEVER supported Bork. The NRA came out against his nomination HARD as did other RKBA advocacy groups.
If Judge Bork was good enough for Ronald Reagan to nominate him to sit on the Supreme Court of the United States, he's good enough to sit on Mitt's endorsement list!
Ronald Reagan:
"The best I can do to recreate for you the eloquence and character of this man is to quote from the statement he made shortly after our meeting.
Judge Bork said this:
"Were the fate of Robert Bork the only matter at stake, I would ask the President to withdraw my nomination. The most serious and lasting injury in all of this, however, is not to me. Rather, it is to the dignity and integrity of law and public service in this country.''
Judge Bork said a critical principle was at stake. He explained it this way, and again I quote:
``Federal judges are not appointed to decide cases according to the latest opinion polls. They are appointed to decide cases impartially, according to law. But when judicial nominees are assessed and treated like political candidates the effect will be to chill the climate in which judicial deliberations take place, to erode public confidence in the impartiality of our judges, and to endanger the independence of the judiciary.''
My fellow Americans, Andrew Jackson said once that ``one man with courage makes a majority.'' Obviously, Bob Bork has that courage, now let's you and I give him our support.
I agree with Judge Bork that there are no illusions. Our judges should be faithful to the written Constitution, the bedrock of our liberties. Those selected for the Supreme Court must be aware of all points of view and their decisions based on government by the people.
Until next week, thanks for listening, and God bless you.
The most excellent question. Why, for heaven’s sake, not Duncan Hunter, the only candidate who understands the job and will do it with grace and boldness.
Don’t forget Reagan and the Mulford Act. Imagine what they’d do to him around here over that.
“Exactly. No matter how distingished a conservative the endorser is, these anti-Romney-bots find a reason suddenly to declare the endorser “not a true conservative.” If God endorsed Romney, they’d explain that God really doesn’t know what He’s doing, His brain is addled, He’s really a flip-flopper, He’s being paid off by the Tri-Lateral-Commission, or is really in the employ of the Demoncrats.”
YOU are the ones who look dopey here.
Dopey and dismissive - you are arguing against straw men of your own creation - not the real reasons people on this thread are saying.
Bork is Anti-RKBA.
Mitt has a terrible judge-picking record.
Add it up.
YOU are the only one who brought up the trilateral commission and other tinfoil crap - easier for you to argue against your own straw men than valid criticism.
The 2nd is about hunting, even if you have hunted twice in your life, supposedly, as a life long hunter.
The 2nd is about each and every citizen be armed with militia weapons to physically oppose government in America.
This is something elitists won’t say.
Agreed there. Romney is obviously becoming the second choice for the checked-pants crowd, but he’s not as bad as Giuliani.
FWIW, Bork has always been first and foremost a statist. He has never been an originalist. AFAIK, he believes in what he thinks is a “plain reading.”
Romney will be a continuation of the Bush power structure. Not ideal, but not disastrous...he buys us more time to try to rebuild the conservative movement.
I think Romney will probably end up as the nominee, and will defeat the Democrat, whether it be Hillary or Obama. He has the advantages of appealing to women (”arousal gap”), and his Northeastern governorship maybe pulls back New Hampshire, Michigan, Ohio, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Washington and Pennsylvania.
“If Judge Bork was good enough for Ronald Reagan to nominate him to sit on the Supreme Court of the United States, he’s good enough to sit on Mitt’s endorsement list!:”
Reagan gave us O’Connor too!
The man wasn’t perfect.
Good endorsement for Mitt. Right now, I think he might be the one to get my vote.
Reagan grew up in the ‘30 and ‘40s. Reagan was a leader, and at the forefront of the conservative movement in his day.
Something Mitt has not, and is not.
Goalposts move. That’s how conservatives take back America. By not being a timid, toe dipping, finger wetting, sail trimming faker.
Mitt hasn’t objected. I don’t think it would bother the Prince of Belmont.
If Rudy were on the ticket, I would vote for a third party or write in a suitable name. I WILL NOT vote for, or put my signature or name next to any candidate who supports abortion and the holocaust of the unborn. I view my duty to God and my ultimate appearance before His bar as more important than a vote for the abject lesser of two evils to that degree.
But that is just me.
I prefer the reasoned, intelligent, and thoughtful endorsements of distinguished conservatives like Judge Bork, William F. Buckley Jr, and Paul Weyrich to the knee-jerk fulminations of the shallow-thinking self-styled "pure" conservatives that infect these Mitt Romney threads.
You can skip the sarcasm tag. Bork is anti-gun.
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.