Showing posts with label Supreme Court. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Supreme Court. Show all posts
May 26, 2009
May 05, 2009
Heh - Justice Gore
This article takes a fun little look, knowing that there's no chance, at Al Gore as a Supreme Court Justice ... not really notable except for the fun thought of Scalia et al sitting on a bench with the "loser" of Bush v. Gore.
May 01, 2009
In life, there are no coincidences
OK, so that's a really stupid title. But it's pretty interesting that the same week that the Dems secure their filibuster proof majority (almost - damn you, Coleman!), we have the announcement that Justice Souter is going to retire. So, on to the biggest story that isn't a story, as six months from now the Court will be exactly the same, just younger and woman-ier.
Politically, this is bad news for the Democrats. As laughably horrible as the Republicans were politically in last year's presidential campaign, the Democrats have gotten to just sit back and laugh as they top themselves in the incompetence department this year. As trite as the saying is, the Republicans are a party divided.
But if there's one issue that can unite (some) people under any circumstances, it's nominating people to the Supreme Court - namely, whether or not they are baby-killers.
This is likely to cause some unity amongst Republicans and is good for them in the short term (by short term, I mean possibly long enough to give them a boost in the 2010 elections). Unfortunately for them - and I can't believe I'm saying this - reigniting the culture war is not a good long-term strategy for them, at least until the economy warms up. (Morality is an issue best left for times of peace and prosperity - are no Republicans getting this memo?) And even then - they've got to be careful - (wow, I went to 538 to find an archived article, but it turns out there's Breaking News!) people are starting to get behind gay marriage (please, no jokes). And that's going to be hard to leave out of a culture war, but including it will only move their party farther to the fringes.
OK, I've been meaning to do a separate post on this for a while, but I'll never get to it, so here we go. Long story short, Newt Gingrich is talking about the possibility of trying to create a moderately conservative third party that would move in the Republicans' space (from the left). I can't believe I'm saying this, but Newt Gingrich and Meghan McCain are the best two political strategists on the entire right of American politics right now (they have the best ideas, anyway).
And I have to say - it makes me sad. I would really like to see a stronger Republican party, because one-party rule is never good, no matter who the party is. But I'd like to see a sensible Republican party as well. I guess I'll have to keep waiting ...
Politically, this is bad news for the Democrats. As laughably horrible as the Republicans were politically in last year's presidential campaign, the Democrats have gotten to just sit back and laugh as they top themselves in the incompetence department this year. As trite as the saying is, the Republicans are a party divided.
But if there's one issue that can unite (some) people under any circumstances, it's nominating people to the Supreme Court - namely, whether or not they are baby-killers.
This is likely to cause some unity amongst Republicans and is good for them in the short term (by short term, I mean possibly long enough to give them a boost in the 2010 elections). Unfortunately for them - and I can't believe I'm saying this - reigniting the culture war is not a good long-term strategy for them, at least until the economy warms up. (Morality is an issue best left for times of peace and prosperity - are no Republicans getting this memo?) And even then - they've got to be careful - (wow, I went to 538 to find an archived article, but it turns out there's Breaking News!) people are starting to get behind gay marriage (please, no jokes). And that's going to be hard to leave out of a culture war, but including it will only move their party farther to the fringes.
OK, I've been meaning to do a separate post on this for a while, but I'll never get to it, so here we go. Long story short, Newt Gingrich is talking about the possibility of trying to create a moderately conservative third party that would move in the Republicans' space (from the left). I can't believe I'm saying this, but Newt Gingrich and Meghan McCain are the best two political strategists on the entire right of American politics right now (they have the best ideas, anyway).
And I have to say - it makes me sad. I would really like to see a stronger Republican party, because one-party rule is never good, no matter who the party is. But I'd like to see a sensible Republican party as well. I guess I'll have to keep waiting ...
January 15, 2009
Supreme Court Ruling Causes Violent Double Take
I nearly hit a car yesterday while driving home. OK, that's not quite true, but I certainly lost my full mental capacities for a moment while listening to NPR report on a recent Supreme Court ruling.
Let's say you are John Smith of Washington County. The cops pull you over for speeding, run your license, and see that you have an arrest warrant out in Washington County. Let's further speculate that the arrest warrant isn't for you, it's for a different John Smith, but was attributed to you by clerical error.
Now we'll have some real fun. Let's say there's something illegal in your car, which of course the cops found during the arrest/search process. Of course, eventually it will be discovered that the warrant was in error and your arrest will be cleared ...
However, due to yesterday's Supreme Court ruling, the evidence that the state had no right to search for or seize from you in the first place is now totally admissable for use in a subsequent prosecution.
I mean, that's just such a blatant abuse of governmental power. It's unfortunate that throwing that evidence out would let guilty people walk, but it's certainly not worth the encroachment on the rights of citizens. I could go on but I'll just stop.
BONUS: While searching for this article I found an article about frequent-atheist-lawsuit-bringer Michael Newdow trying to get religious references pulled from next week's inaugural address. He'll surely fail so why does he keep trying? According to these two articles the answer is simple: atheists have so much narcissim and hubris, there's no other way to release it.
Let's say you are John Smith of Washington County. The cops pull you over for speeding, run your license, and see that you have an arrest warrant out in Washington County. Let's further speculate that the arrest warrant isn't for you, it's for a different John Smith, but was attributed to you by clerical error.
Now we'll have some real fun. Let's say there's something illegal in your car, which of course the cops found during the arrest/search process. Of course, eventually it will be discovered that the warrant was in error and your arrest will be cleared ...
However, due to yesterday's Supreme Court ruling, the evidence that the state had no right to search for or seize from you in the first place is now totally admissable for use in a subsequent prosecution.
I mean, that's just such a blatant abuse of governmental power. It's unfortunate that throwing that evidence out would let guilty people walk, but it's certainly not worth the encroachment on the rights of citizens. I could go on but I'll just stop.
BONUS: While searching for this article I found an article about frequent-atheist-lawsuit-bringer Michael Newdow trying to get religious references pulled from next week's inaugural address. He'll surely fail so why does he keep trying? According to these two articles the answer is simple: atheists have so much narcissim and hubris, there's no other way to release it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
