Why it matters

[Chief Joseph]

People want to believe the Supreme Court will always side with the Constitution and the 2nd Amendment NEED to realize how important who sits in the WH. This decision was NOT fully supported. It was a decision of 5-4, By the vote of JUST ONE did it happen. If nobama or any other democrat were in office, and able to appoint just ONE more judge, the 2nd Amendment would have taken a huge hit. We already have one supreme who has admitted she uses FOREIGN LAW when making her decisions and has publicly trashed OUR Constitution, one she SWORE AN OATH TO UPHOLD. I'm sorry, but these are not the times to stick our heads in the sand.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/06/28/supremecourt/main6626538.shtml?tag=contentMain;contentBody

[Bill K]

The problem Chief Joseph is that a large segment of our citizenry feels that the problem with the Supreme court is the "conservative" Justices not the "liberal' ones. In my 68 years I've never seen our [once?] great nation so divided on so many important issues.

[muggsy]

+1 Chief. That's why it's so important to elect conservatives to office.

[Longitude Zero]

However some of the justices appointed by conservatives presidents turned out to be anything but...

I would prefer a conservative president appointing justices but those who stupidly believe that will solve all our ills are dumb enough to buy beach front property in Colorado.

It is a huge mix of factors many of them so intangible as to be beyond comprehension.

[muggsy]

However some of the justices appointed by conservatives presidents turned out to be anything but...

I would prefer a conservative president appointing justices but those who stupidly believe that will solve all our ills are dumb enough to buy beach front property in Colorado.

It is a huge mix of factors many of them so intangible as to be beyond comprehension.

And you believe that a liberal president will appoint a conservative justice? Excuse me, but somehow I seem to have missed the logic of your statement.

[WMD]

Regardless of who sits on those benches, I think we all agree the Liberal mentality has got to go. We need to uphold our constitution and enforce our laws.

[johnh]

Exactly! Until that happens, we are just sliding down the slippery slope... :(

[apheod]

The two party system has got to be done away with. The majority of both parties are essentially bought and paid for, and have no interest in upholding the constitution or representing the common people.

Although I agree voting conservative will turn this into **** Germany more slowly than voting liberal.

[chrish]

The two party system has got to be done away with. The majority of both parties are essentially bought and paid for, and have no interest in upholding the constitution or representing the common people.

Although I agree voting conservative will turn this into **** Germany more slowly than voting liberal.

Bingo! Something's gotta change. Don't know what that's gonna be or what form it's gonna take. If convservatives acted like conservatives instead of either mid-roaders, liberals, or worse, corporate and local government shills just in it to bring my tax dollars back to some other poor sod somewhere else in the country, then maybe we'd get somewhere. Libertarians have it mostly right, but the day we see enough Libertarians running the show at a level to do any good will be the day I've been 6 feet under for decades. And I think it'd take something more than an election to get there. We'll have to reset to the Constitution to get there.

[TheTman]

I just hope the Republicans remember how the Democrats crammed stuff down their throats and acted like little dictators. The Republicans play too nice and compromise too damn much when they are in power, time for them to get tough. I know people are tired of beating a dead horse, but with Sheriff Arpaio's new revelations about Obama's birth certificate, why has no house comittee been formed to look into it? My congressmen wrote me back that it passed the scrutiny of some University of Pennsylvania committee formed to look into it, so a bunch of Dem supporters okayed it, that doesn't mean much to me.

[Longitude Zero]

Excuse me, but somehow I seem to have missed the logic of your statement.

This is not news. To reiteratre and simplfy, just because a conservative prez appoints a justice does not mean they will be conservative ruling. As to liberal appointees the result is obvious. Since you asked it is APPARENT EVERYBODY else understood.

Thus endeth your education!!!

[Chief Joseph]

This is not news. To reiteratre and simplfy, just because a conservative prez appoints a justice does not mean they will be conservative ruling. As to liberal appointees the result is obvious. Since you asked it is APPARENT EVERYBODY else understood.

Thus endeth your education!!!

The problem is, a democRAT WILL appoint someone who REJECTS our Constitution, will rule against it EVERY TIME, and will push their own agenda over it. A Republican will appoint someone who will respect the Constitution, but occasionally go off track. It still doesn't change the fact that democrat appointees are always anti American.

[muggsy]

This is not news. To reiteratre and simplfy, just because a conservative prez appoints a justice does not mean they will be conservative ruling. As to liberal appointees the result is obvious. Since you asked it is APPARENT EVERYBODY else understood.

Thus endeth your education!!!

If you had put it that way in the first place I wouldn't have had to ask. Sensitive aren't we?

[Longitude Zero]

If you had put it that way in the first place I wouldn't have had to ask. Sensitive aren't we?

Nope. My first post was crystal clear to begin with.

[Longitude Zero]

The problem is, a democRAT WILL appoint someone who REJECTS our Constitution, will rule against it EVERY TIME, and will push their own agenda over it. A Republican will appoint someone who will respect the Constitution, but occasionally go off track. It still doesn't change the fact that democrat appointees are always anti American.

Agreed but some of the supremes nominated by conservative prezs did not occasionally go off the track they derailed into the ditch from the get go.

Dem appointees in the current era have always done harm consistently. Republican appointees have occasinally done the harm.

[popgoestheweasel]

+1 Chief. That's why it's so important to elect conservatives to office.

Watch the video (linked below) about the presumptive Republican Presidential nominee...a true conservative we can believe in!!!

http://video.foxnews.com/v/1523232634001/romney-an-etch-a-sketch-candidate

[apheod]

just watched the video... although i agree with the message (he's a flip flopping ********* who can't be trusted to stick to what he says... even though i dont agree with what he's saying to begin with) they didn't really get down to the substance of why he's a horrible candidate.

i might have to start ripping into this guy, lest the forum embrace him. i mean, i guess we're going to HAVE to vote for him when it comes down to him or obama, but i don't want folks to be thinking that he's someone to vote FOR, only that obama is someone to vote AGAINST.

romney is scum, plain and simple.

[popgoestheweasel]

scum....i was thinking more along the lines of slimy. where is ross perot when we need him? good ole plain spoken guy.

[tilefish]

I am VERY concerned with who gets to make the next supreme court nominations. If Bam Bam gets to make the appointments, we are in deep trouble.

[Chief Joseph]

scum....i was thinking more along the lines of slimy. where is ross perot when we need him? good ole plain spoken guy.

Agreed, but given the choice, ANYONE over scumbag nobama.

[muggsy]

Watch the video (linked below) about the presumptive Republican Presidential nominee...a true conservative we can believe in!!!

http://video.foxnews.com/v/1523232634001/romney-an-etch-a-sketch-candidate

Mitt wasn't my first choice, but he will be if he's the nominee. My primary vote went to Santorum. Either would make a better president than the POS that currently occupies the White House. (Did you notice how cleverly I worked in the word Occupy?) :)

[muggsy]

scum....i was thinking more along the lines of slimy. where is ross perot when we need him? good ole plain spoken guy.

Ross is currently sniffing the hind ends of the other three candidates. That's his usual spot in the pecking order.

[popgoestheweasel]

Ross is currently sniffing the hind ends of the other three candidates. That's his usual spot in the pecking order.

:D Good one!!! I see alot of similarities between Ross and Ron Paul.

[Longitude Zero]

Ross Perot = Ron Paul. Both exhibit the little mans syndrome along with other idiotic beahviors. Both should be locked up together in the ***** hatch at the local insane asylum.

[MikeyKahr]

Sounds like a "Lost" episode

Sent using Tapatalk

[apheod]

don't you just hate those guys who talk about following the constitution to the T? what a bunch of loons. i mean, he doesn't even want to exterminate the muslims. CMON!!

talking about ron paul, don't know too much about perot. i was a kid when he ran, i remember him as being eccentric, having a funny voice, using a lot of charts and basically being a laughing stock, but never really had the interest since i started closely following politics about 12 years ago to read up on what he was all about.

[Chief Joseph]

Ross wasn't a laughing stock. He was portrayed as one by the left, since that's the only way they do things. Much like today, they can't stand on truth or facts, so they use crappy unfunny comedy shows like snl and letterman to confuse their stupid base. I liked Ross and never forgave Bush 1 for the "read my lips".