Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Supreme Court Sides With Texas in Dispute With Bush Over Mexican's Death Row Case
Fox News ^ | 3/25/2008

Posted on 03/25/2008 7:41:15 AM PDT by B Knotts

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-110 next last
To: definitelynotaliberal
I think more freepers need to read books on game strategy and political positioning. Believing that American can survive purely on “feel good I'm more moral than you” is naive. Conservatives elect conservative presidents because they believe in the morals that these presidents espouse in their lives. We then hope these morals will transfer to their strategies and policies.

Conservatives will always lose in the battle of only morals vs. only strategy. The difference is that those who practice amoral strategy don't care what they do to win, whereas the moral strategists are bound by a code of conduct to which the other side refuses to adhere. A great politician is a moral man who uses his morals to serve the best interest of the republic.

I may be the FreeRepublic idiot, but I still don't see anyone who is willing to step away from the keyboard and enact change. To say you are powerless to enact change is to say that you are not the government.

61 posted on 03/25/2008 9:53:59 AM PDT by Skenderbej
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: Skenderbej

I concur robustly with what you said. I’m struck by what you said about game theory. I didn’t realize it, but that is exactly what has been going on in his assault weapons ban action, the Roberts nomination following the crime against Miguel Estrada and one of my favorites, when he manipulated the situation to have Elizabeth Edwards (it could’ve been anyone from the Scary-Leftwards crew) stand in front of the NEA the Saturday before 2 Nov. ‘04 and repeat inanely ad infinitum: johnkerry and John Edwards voted for No child left behind ....... Thinking people would ask, “OK, they did, but if the President hadn’t set it up, what would those two have done?” The NEA is composed of bipedal mammals/dummycrats, but that spectacle was a treat for the rest of us.


62 posted on 03/25/2008 10:02:04 AM PDT by definitelynotaliberal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: indylindy
Sorry Bush, you lose this one.

Did he? Perhaps he was allowing the courts to take the hit knowing how they would rule.

63 posted on 03/25/2008 10:09:25 AM PDT by Robert DeLong
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: JoeGar

So Bush is supposed to go down and construct the fence himself? Sometimes you have to play politics


64 posted on 03/25/2008 10:11:17 AM PDT by Robert DeLong
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: definitelynotaliberal

I’m not saying that everything Bush does (or doesn’t do) is the effect of careful planning and game theory. I especially don’t believe that Bush and Rove cause Democrats to come unglued or that Rove has a giant climate change machine. I leave those theories to the conspirists! I do believe that Bush and his advisors (including conservative judges) use more planning and strategy than is commonly portrayed.

Good strategies mask what you are really trying to accomplish, like playing chess or poker. That is why the gay “marriage” movement has not succeeded thus far. Their strategy is not subtle enough to escape detection by the people. Game theory and strategy (in politics and economics) have become more important in the last 30 years and unless we keep up with what the other side uses against us, we will lose.


65 posted on 03/25/2008 10:14:14 AM PDT by Skenderbej
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: Skenderbej

Would you say that he saw in this case an opportunity to underscore the 10th ammendment?


66 posted on 03/25/2008 10:31:00 AM PDT by definitelynotaliberal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: Robert DeLong

I suppose you could be right. However, based on Bush policy for catering to Mexico, I kind of doubt it.


67 posted on 03/25/2008 10:31:20 AM PDT by dforest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: Skenderbej
I disagree. Bush sided with the illegal in this case knowing that his decision would not hold up in court. This allowed him to play the diplomacy card while ensuring the illegal would not go free. I know there are a lot of Bush haters, but he has more smarts (and a better staff) than he is credited with.

If what you say is the reason, I wouldn't call it smart in the least. He once again showed citizens that he has a disdain for us all and most especially for those that are for enforcing our existing illegal immigration laws.
68 posted on 03/25/2008 10:40:13 AM PDT by CottonBall (A minority is powerless while it conforms to the majority. "Civil Disobedience", Henry D.Thoreau)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: B Knotts

He’s got time for that but not Ramos and Campeon.


69 posted on 03/25/2008 10:42:40 AM PDT by PsyOp (Truth in itself is rarely sufficient to make men act. - Clauswitz, On War, 1832.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PsyOp
He’s got time for that but not Ramos and Campeon.

Excellent point.

McAmnesty won't lift a finger to help them either.
70 posted on 03/25/2008 10:48:31 AM PDT by CottonBall (A minority is powerless while it conforms to the majority. "Civil Disobedience", Henry D.Thoreau)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: Skenderbej

I think you are probably correct but we thought he would veto CFR and then that CFR would be struck down in any event etc

one can be too clever by half


71 posted on 03/25/2008 10:51:22 AM PDT by wardaddy (Obama: The candidate for those who think Deliverance was a documentary.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: beaversmom
As far as I understand it, Medellin had been here since he was a baby—born in Mexico, but raised here.

AKA, a sleeper agent.

72 posted on 03/25/2008 11:31:09 AM PDT by Gondring (I'll give up my right to die when hell freezes over my dead body!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Jane Austen

He went out of his way, since he had no jurisdiction, as confirmed now by the Supreme Court. Yet as Governor of Texas, how many times did he state that he could do nothing else to interfere with a death sentence? Not that he necessarily should have, but it just shows how much he seems to like Mexican citizens more than our own.

He has a real disdain for the average American, especially any one not currently in uniform.


73 posted on 03/25/2008 11:41:57 AM PDT by kenth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Skenderbej

I agree with you.


74 posted on 03/25/2008 12:42:07 PM PDT by 1035rep
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeDude

Or Bush shielded himself by appearing to follow the agreement, all the while knowing what SCOTUS would do. That way the politically insulated branch takes the heat rather than him. I would not have done that, but it is obvious that the SCOTUS was leaning this way to begin with.


75 posted on 03/25/2008 2:57:49 PM PDT by Clump (Your family may not be safe, but at least their library records will be.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: mdittmar
Yes.

Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for the majority, disagreed. Roberts said the international court decision cannot be forced upon the states.

The president may not "establish binding rules of decision that pre-empt contrary state law," Roberts said. Neither does the treaty, by itself, require individual states to take action, he said.



Lets see ... States have rights not superseded by the Federal government and International Court of Justice "take a hike". I like that.

But wasn't it Kennedy who wrote an opinion when O'Connor was still on the court that said the International Court of Justice decisions were rightfully determiners of US decisions? No he changed his mind.
76 posted on 03/25/2008 3:26:32 PM PDT by K-oneTexas (I'm not a judge and there ain't enough of me to be a jury. (Zell Miller, A National Party No More))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: beaversmom
Just clicked on it.

Am I given to understand that these perps were not US citizens?

Not another penny to the GOP until we have a wall.

NO cheers, unfortunately.

Prayers for the families.

Remember "The War of Jenkins' Ear" from history class?

77 posted on 03/25/2008 4:49:14 PM PDT by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory

If they didnt say that they were from another country..

And “dont ask, dont tell” is used there...

like Prop 40 in LA County..

Then the consulate would not be called in...

Of course this could always be used as a “dodge” by a defence ...

Oooooooo the po’ widdle illegal alien wasnt given all his rights...


78 posted on 03/25/2008 6:26:56 PM PDT by Tennessee Nana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: grey_whiskers

I don’t know about all of them, but Medellin was a citizen of Mexico but had lived in the U.S. most of his life. The O’Brien fellow was black and I believe he has already been executed. Yep, found the link on his exectuion:

Convicted Killer of Two Houston (Texas) Girls Executed
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1663981/posts

Some of the people were under eighteen at the time of the murder and then when the Supreme Court ruled against putting juveniles at the time of their crime to death, they got out of it that way.


79 posted on 03/25/2008 9:32:25 PM PDT by beaversmom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: Jane Austen
WTH, Bush comes to aid of death row killers if they are Mexican!!

Bush sees all latinos as "new Americans".

THE "NEW AMERICAN"
..........<

We are now one of the largest Spanish-speaking nations in the world. We're a major source of Latin music, journalism and culture.

Just go to Miami, or San Antonio, Los Angeles, Chicago or West New York, New Jersey ... and close your eyes and listen. You could just as easily be in Santo Domingo or Santiago, or San Miguel de Allende.

For years our nation has debated this change -- some have praised it and others have resented it. By nominating me, my party has made a choice to welcome the new America.

Our future cannot be separated from the future of Latin America.

As I speak, we are celebrating the success of democracy in Mexico.

George Bush from a campaign speech in Miami, August 2000.

You can read the speech here.

Here is an excerpt of a good critique of that speech:

In equating our intimate historic bonds to our mother country and to Canada with our ties to Mexico, W. shows a staggering ignorance of the civilizational facts of life. The reason we are so close to Britain and Canada is that we share with them a common historical culture, language, literature, and legal system, as well as similar standards of behavior, expectations of public officials, and so on. My Bush Epiphany By Lawrence Auster

80 posted on 03/26/2008 3:23:11 AM PDT by raybbr (You think it's bad now - wait till the anchor babies start to vote!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-110 next 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson