Arizona Senator John McCain (official)

[bigballin2987]

Originally Posted by Buckeyeskickbuttocks

Regan appointed both. If they're not conservative enough for the right, themn maybe you all should knock ol Ronny off his pedestal a little.

I am not upset that they are not conservative enough. My point was that they are the swing voters. Liek with Souter, just because they are appointed by a conservative does not make them a Scalia.

[sandgk]

Originally Posted by bigballin2987

I am not upset that they are not conservative enough. My point was that they are the swing voters. Liek with Souter, just because they are appointed by a conservative does not make them a Scalia.

So, it isn't that they are not sufficiently conservative, merely that they don't vote in line with conservative positions in cases before the Court?

OK.

[bigballin2987]

Originally Posted by sandgk

So, it isn't that they are not sufficiently conservative, merely that they don't vote in line with conservative positions in cases before the Court?

OK.

What are you talking about?

I was saying they are not known as conservative judges, and the fact that they were appointed by a Republican does not make them a conservative judge.

[buckeyegrad]

Originally Posted by Buckeyeskickbuttocks

So, you don't want a conservative Court, you want a radical conservative Court. Like I said, such a Court scares the [censored] out of me. I won't rehash those reasons here... but, such a Court would be scary indeed.

It is only radical if you consider the current courts conservative, which they are not. To say they are anything other than moderate is laughable.

Re Souter: Well, maybe Bush the Elder shouldn't have picked him. Not my fault your side of the aisle can't figure out who to appoint, or that the extremists you prefer get laughed out of congress.

I'm not complaining about past appointment here, I'm taking issue with your characterization of the Rehnquist and Roberts Courts as being conservative. Who appointed whom is irrelevant.

And if you consider Robert Bork (the only appointee I can think of being rejected by the Congress) an extremist, tells me how out of touch you are considering he is one of the most respected legal minds of the last 30+ years in the United States.

you haven't seen Big Business/Government get away with [censored]ing you until you have such a Court.

Ah yes, the "big business boogie-man". I'll take my chances with them over big governmen any day as they don't have the ability to tax or imprison me.

Anyway.... the "conservative" Courts in years past have firmly established that black people aren't actually people.... and are partly responsible for the crash of 1929 (in keeping very little check on business shenanigans) and so on.... careful what you wish for. We're in a precarious economic situation as is..... (which, incidentally, is ALSO a problem brought on by conservatives.... )

Right, and early 21st century conservativism is just like pre-Depression conservatism. Then again, maybe I should use your anachronistic line of reasoning and point out that it was the Democrats who were the ones who defined Blacks as property, so I guess that means it really was the liberals who did this. As for today's economic problems, they have much more to do with a hyper-interventionist Fed that thinks it can engineer the economy so as to prevent anyone from failing rather than allowing the market to self-correct itself.

[Buckeyeskickbuttocks]

Originally Posted by buckeyegrad

It is only radical if you consider the current courts conservative, which they are not. To say they are anything other than moderate is laughable.

Says who? You? You'll forgive me my ignorance in having a different view of the world. I should know by now, it's the Right's way or "wrong."

My bad.

And if you consider Robert Bork (the only appointee I can think of being rejected by the Congress) an extremist, tells me how out of touch you are considering he is one of the most respected legal minds of the last 30+ years in the United States.

Being "brilliant" has nothing to do with it.

Ah yes, the "big business boogie-man". I'll take my chances with them over big governmen any day as they don't have the ability to tax or imprison me.

I said "Big Business/Gov" to mean big business AND Government. I hate to pull the "I do this for a living" card, but... I don't care what you think about the issue of if conservative Justices are pro or con Government, I know for a fact that they are.

Right, and early 21st century conservativism is just like pre-Depression conservatism. Then again, maybe I should use your anachronistic line of reasoning and point out that it was the Democrats who were the ones who defined Blacks as property, so I guess that means it really was the liberals who did this. As for today's economic problems, they have much more to do with a hyper-interventionist Fed that thinks it can engineer the economy so as to prevent anyone from failing rather than allowing the market to self-correct itself.

Maybe you should.... but you'll note I said conservative... not Republican. So, you can blame the "democrats" all you want... it's irrelevant to what I'm talking about. Fact... the Court was conservative in the relevant years leading up to the Crash. Fact... the Court was conservative in the "slavery" relevant years.... You can call them Republicans, Democrats, Whigs or whatever else you want, Bgrad. I don't give a [censored].

Re: who's to blame for today's problematic economy.... I should have expected an excuse. I suppose if this was still the Clinton administration we could agree to place the blame squarely on his shoulders. Good enough for me. But.... alas, when Clinton was in the big chair, the economy was doing just fine (And, of course, the Republicans took the credit....) and then Dubya comes, and the spending goes up... (and the dems somehow get the blame)... and it gets worse and worse... gas goes up, economy gets even weaker... starts to look like the mid 70s stagflation all over again... and now.... well.. it's a meddeling Fed.... I'm just shocked that the Super-duper Republicans have been so inept at figuring out how to address that issue... But.. hey... it's not thier fault, right? Always, always, always blame someone else. Never admit a weakness, let alone a failure... and history? Bah.. who needs it.

And... what's with the hostility?

[buckeyegrad]

Ori