A Cars forum. AutoBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AutoBanter forum » Auto newsgroups » Driving
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Supreme Court is out of control



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old June 25th 05, 02:11 AM
Jim Yanik
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Paul. > wrote in
th.net:

> On Fri, 24 Jun 2005 14:12:53 -0400, Alex Rodriguez , said the
> following in rec.autos.driving...
>
>
>>
>> I wonder if it was the same idiots for the dog sniffing who voted for
>> the seizure of property?

>
> Probablly. Those 9 senile old idiots have been there for quite a
> while.
>


Uh,the vote was 5-4,not unanimous.
It appears that at least 4 USSC Justices still obey the Constitution.

This is what the US People get for electing socialist Presidents who select
socialist USSC "Justices".

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net
Ads
  #12  
Old June 25th 05, 02:59 AM
Nate Nagel
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Jim Yanik wrote:
> Paul. > wrote in
> th.net:
>
>
>>On Fri, 24 Jun 2005 14:12:53 -0400, Alex Rodriguez , said the
>>following in rec.autos.driving...
>>
>>
>>
>>>I wonder if it was the same idiots for the dog sniffing who voted for
>>>the seizure of property?

>>
>>Probablly. Those 9 senile old idiots have been there for quite a
>>while.
>>

>
>
> Uh,the vote was 5-4,not unanimous.
> It appears that at least 4 USSC Justices still obey the Constitution.
>
> This is what the US People get for electing socialist Presidents who select
> socialist USSC "Justices".
>


Oh please.

It's not so much that I disagree with your point, but can you honestly
say with a straight face that either side is worse than the other when
it comes to appointing blatantly biased and/or obviously unsuitable
people to various positions? The current administration is notable by
its adherence to that trend. Or are you calling the Bush administration
"socialist?"

nate

--
replace "fly" with "com" to reply.
http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel
  #13  
Old June 25th 05, 03:37 AM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Jim Yanik wrote:
>
> This is what the US People get for electing socialist Presidents who select
> socialist USSC "Justices".
>


Yeah - John Paul Stevens, that noted leftist (laff) was appointed by
another notorious leftist.

Gerald Ford.

Anthony Kennedy? Yup, a Republican appointed by Reagan.

Hey, even David Souter is a Republican. Appointed by Bush I.

Better luck next time, doofus.

E.P.

  #14  
Old June 25th 05, 03:39 AM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Nate Nagel wrote:
>
>
> Oh please.
>
> It's not so much that I disagree with your point, but can you honestly
> say with a straight face that either side is worse than the other when
> it comes to appointing blatantly biased and/or obviously unsuitable
> people to various positions? The current administration is notable by
> its adherence to that trend. Or are you calling the Bush administration
> "socialist?"
>
> nate
>



Of course not. Since Dubya is one of "Jim's guys", everything *he*
does is golden. It's those *other guys* that are the problem.

Now, mind you, someone with the opposite bent would say the exact
opposite. Neither recognizes the blatant, idiotic hypocrisy of it.

E.P.

  #15  
Old June 25th 05, 06:07 PM
Jim Yanik
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Nate Nagel > wrote in
news:1119664765.ee5ba4c49269e80fbc3089e16c4bd584@t eranews:

> Jim Yanik wrote:
>> Paul. > wrote in
>> th.net:
>>
>>
>>>On Fri, 24 Jun 2005 14:12:53 -0400, Alex Rodriguez , said the
>>>following in rec.autos.driving...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>I wonder if it was the same idiots for the dog sniffing who voted
>>>>for the seizure of property?
>>>
>>>Probablly. Those 9 senile old idiots have been there for quite a
>>>while.
>>>

>>
>>
>> Uh,the vote was 5-4,not unanimous.
>> It appears that at least 4 USSC Justices still obey the Constitution.
>>
>> This is what the US People get for electing socialist Presidents who
>> select socialist USSC "Justices".
>>

>
> Oh please.
>
> It's not so much that I disagree with your point, but can you honestly
> say with a straight face that either side is worse than the other when
> it comes to appointing blatantly biased and/or obviously unsuitable
> people to various positions? The current administration is notable by
> its adherence to that trend. Or are you calling the Bush
> administration "socialist?"
>
> nate
>


Just look at the DemocRATs;they are rabid socialists.
Dean,their chosen leader,is assuredly rabid.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net
  #16  
Old June 26th 05, 01:52 AM
Bernard Farquart
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Jim Yanik" .> wrote in message
.. .

> Just look at the DemocRATs;they are rabid socialists.
> Dean,their chosen leader,is assuredly rabid.
>

You can not even spell the party name without making it a smear,
yet you call others "rabid"?

Funny, that.

Bernard


  #17  
Old June 26th 05, 05:38 AM
DTJ
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 17:52:31 -0700, "Bernard Farquart"
> wrote:

>> Just look at the DemocRATs;they are rabid socialists.
>> Dean,their chosen leader,is assuredly rabid.
>>

>You can not even spell the party name without making it a smear,
>yet you call others "rabid"?
>
>Funny, that.


While I see your point, sometimes people get so upset over the
radicals in the other party that they stoop to the same low level that
the radicals do.

I hate liberalism. I know a lot of democrats I like and respect.
There are republicans I disapprove of also. We all know I can respond
like that, even though I respect opinions I disagree with, simply by
allowing said radical to incite me.

The fact is that anyone who wants to look at the situation objectively
will know which party is better, or less evil. The ones who can't see
that are not going to listen to reason. Those who can see that won't
change their minds easily, because they have seen the facts.
Interestingly enough, those people who can see, make up a decent
portion of both parties.
  #18  
Old June 26th 05, 06:52 PM
Bernard Farquart
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"DTJ" > wrote in message
news
> The fact is that anyone who wants to look at the situation objectively
> will know which party is better, or less evil. The ones who can't see
> that are not going to listen to reason. Those who can see that won't
> change their minds easily, because they have seen the facts.
> Interestingly enough, those people who can see, make up a decent
> portion of both parties.


It is possible for two people to come to different
conclusions using the same facts.
I just feel that posters who use "democRATS" are
about as resonable as those who use "REPUGS"



  #19  
Old June 26th 05, 07:04 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



DTJ wrote:
> On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 17:52:31 -0700, "Bernard Farquart"
> > wrote:
>
> >> Just look at the DemocRATs;they are rabid socialists.
> >> Dean,their chosen leader,is assuredly rabid.
> >>

> >You can not even spell the party name without making it a smear,
> >yet you call others "rabid"?
> >
> >Funny, that.

>
> While I see your point, sometimes people get so upset over the
> radicals in the other party that they stoop to the same low level that
> the radicals do.


That does not make it acceptable. It's an excuse - a way to avoid
being responsible for one's actions.

> I hate liberalism.


All that means is that you *hate.*

Nothing more. If liberalism were everything ascribed to it by it's
enemies, then it would have seen the dustbin of history long ago. Yet
radical ideas find slow acceptance, and soon enough, the Earth is no
longer the center of the universe, men no longer own other men in a
free society, and people of color may vote.

> I know a lot of democrats I like and respect.


"Some of my best friends are black."

> The fact is that anyone who wants to look at the situation objectively
> will know which party is better, or less evil.


Except that's just your bias. We know which one *you* think is less
evil - but that doesn't mean you arrived at that conclusion using pure
logic.

Other reasonable people come to just the opposite conclusion. But in
your mind, they serve evil, while you serve good.

That's just plain bigotry, and has nothing to do with logic or reason.

E.P.

  #20  
Old June 26th 05, 07:23 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

This ruling is crazy! I had no idea about the details until now...
I think they should enact a law saying any property taken for any use
must stay owned by the govt for at least 10 years. That way shady
people can't get cheap land from the govt very fast at least.

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Connecticut Supreme Court hits car rental company for GPS spying L Sternn Driving 1 May 2nd 05 10:09 PM
YOU CAN'T DRIVE TOO SLOW Laura Bush murdered her boy friend Driving 93 April 21st 05 10:34 AM
NYT: If You Think You've Heard It All, Take a Left and HitTraffic Court Biwah Driving 0 February 23rd 05 10:56 AM
A-holes over at Philadephia traffic court jerking me around... Cory Dunkle Driving 20 December 31st 04 12:30 AM
Supreme Court Limits Damages to $1,000 for Misleading Loans MrPepper11 General 14 December 4th 04 07:21 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:58 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AutoBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.