HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » catnhatnh » Journal
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next »

catnhatnh

Profile Information

Member since: Sat Nov 20, 2004, 01:55 PM
Number of posts: 8,257

Journal Archives

Why the next Supreme Court Justice must be a liberal

During his confirmation hearings for the Supreme Court in 2005, John Roberts assured senators that his job as a judge was merely "to call balls and strikes." It was a familiar, homey allusion, deliberately designed to suggest that ideology didn't — or anyway, shouldn't — play a role in deciding cases. He would be interpreting the plain meaning of the law, not making up his own.
Snip


But as fond as conservatives are of this kind of imagery, it's mostly a myth. Recently the Constitutional Accountability Center took a look at Supreme Court rulings during the Roberts era, but instead of looking at hot button social issues they looked at the kinds of rulings that, although they get less attention, actually take up the bulk of the court's time: those involving business and corporate law. The results were pretty startling.
Snip


The kinds of regulatory issues involved in these cases are, in the long run, more important than all but the most explosive culture war cases. They include things like Citizens United, which allowed corporations to spend unlimited sums in political campaigns; Ledbetter v. Goodyear, which effectively eliminated the right to sue for race or gender pay discrimination; and Exxon v. Baker, which slashed the damage award in the Exxon Valdez oil spill case by 80%. And those are only the big ones. You can add in hundreds of other, smaller cases that have slowly but steadily chipped away at the right to hold corporations accountable over the past three decades.


http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2010/06/balls-and-strikes-and-roberts-court


More in the link-good read

A general rule of debate:

If, as a result,you get tied to "Killing Fields" Kissinger, no matter what your supporters or the msm pundocracy may say, you ain't "won" shit...

Deep background on Hillary

"A piece imagining the class of 1965 at its ten-year reunion predicted that Rodham would become a nun named “Sister Fridigidaire.”"

I was asked if Bernie came from a segregated high school. I found this gem on Hillary from 1965. Her school certainly doesn't resemble the UN...


http://www.buzzfeed.com/christophermassie/heres-what-hillary-clinton-did-in-her-senior-year-of-high-sc#.fpv5z9ZmX

.....








Thank you for the heart....

The Rubiot of Marco Khyam

The Moving Finger writes; and, having writ,
Moves on: nor all your Piety nor Wit
Shall lure it back to cancel half a Line,
Nor all your Tears wash out a Word of it.












Sorry Omar.....

A Bosnian Sniper,Tentatively identified as Tenzing Norgay...

...has admitted firing on Hillary Clinton as she stood in line at a Marine recruiting center....


There-if they wish to post lies I can't refute I'll laugh at near truths they can't respond to.

They write themselves...

Hillary Clinton Verified account ‏@HillaryClinton 18m18 minutes ago

“Do not grow weary doing good. Do not get discouraged. Do not give up.” —Hillary in Flint

James Michener-Hawaii "The missionaries came to Hawaii to do good and it appears they did very well..."

Jesus Christ!

If I hadn't seen this myself I wouldn't believe it. I won't even say what it is until I have a witness...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/110742300

Is the MSNBC post debate coverage streaming anywhere?

Thanks....

At one point

Hillary was pissed and they agreed to give her 30 seconds...after her response seemed to go on too long I checked my clock and her 30 seconds went on another 95 seconds. So Chuck and Rachel either had no clock, or fucked up, or were biased. Which do you think?

Edit for spelling....
Go to Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next »