Latest Breaking News

stevenleser

(32,886 posts)

77. The responses require a double face palm. In fact, I only wish I had more arms and hands so that...

Sat May 18, 2013, 04:54 PM

May 2013

I could give those responses a triple or quadruple face palm.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_xoqAOYMblow/TKJ1nJQ0O4I/AAAAAAAAAAs/jPjAcdDampI/s1600/triple+facepalm.jpg

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

80 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

John Paul Stevens: Bush v. Gore Decision Rationale Was 'Unacceptable' [View all] kpete May 2013 OP

They all come out of the woodwork now after our economy has been ruined AllyCat May 2013 #1

exactly heaven05 May 2013 #17

It sells books and raises speaking engagement fees. xtraxritical May 2013 #25

thanks heaven05 May 2013 #27

Lies have a way of catching up....They want to right this wrong before they meet thei finial Judge.. Tippy May 2013 #26

yep heaven05 May 2013 #28

What are you going on about? Stevens voted AGAINST the decision which put Bush in the White House CreekDog May 2013 #32

yes! heaven05 May 2013 #41

what is your rant about Justice Stevens --is he too liberal for you? CreekDog May 2013 #44

NO heaven05 May 2013 #48

I fully agree gopiscrap May 2013 #56

Don't get all worked up...I now realize I should have named the guilty... Tippy May 2013 #51

That was an interesting comment: sulphurdunn May 2013 #74

You are quite right dotymed May 2013 #19

Her husband has Alzheimer's, which is why she wanted a Republican tblue37 May 2013 #24

In heaven05 May 2013 #43

Bush v. Gore mehrrh May 2013 #31

Wasn't O'Connor's point that the court didn't need to take the case as opposed to the decision? 24601 May 2013 #60

Stevens wrote the original dissent in the case .... markpkessinger May 2013 #35

I know that. Just all of a sudden, the Supremes are coming out and saying it candidly AllyCat May 2013 #68

"They"? Justice Stevens wrote the DISSENT in Bush vs. Gore. Hekate May 2013 #63

I know. Please see #68. Maybe Creekdog will do the same after sending a PM AllyCat May 2013 #69

It's way late to be apoligizing for that huge mistake, doncha think? Harriety May 2013 #2

Remember there were 2 decisions. The first was 7 to 2.Stevens had nothing to do with the 5 to 4 graham4anything May 2013 #5

you do realize he wrote the dissent against the decision, right? magical thyme May 2013 #18

What does Stevens have to apologize for? NYC Liberal May 2013 #23

Stevens has to apologize for that poster's ignorance CreekDog May 2013 #33

Stevens didnt make a mistake. He dissented from the majority and wrote the dissenting opinion. stevenleser May 2013 #76

That's two now. AndyA May 2013 #3

For my lifetime and beyond... Island Deac May 2013 #6

He wrote the dissenting opinion on Bush v Gore - he was never for that decision - so there's only UpInArms May 2013 #16

Yes, I know Stevens wrote the dissent AndyA May 2013 #54

Stevens commented on that at the time. This is nothing new. His dissent said it all. stevenleser May 2013 #75

My observation was that two of the Justices have recently commented on Bush v. Gore AndyA May 2013 #78

If you don't know that Stevens voted against the decision, why are you commenting on it? CreekDog May 2013 #30

I did it just to provoke a response from you AndyA May 2013 #53

you said "that's two now" --well it's only ONE now CreekDog May 2013 #57

Again, YOUR words not mine. AndyA May 2013 #59

Stevens is one of the good ones.If only they stopped after the 7 to 2 to go back to Florida. graham4anything May 2013 #4

Nader was no longer in my book after that. To me he has undone all the good things JackN415 May 2013 #9

I agree with you, except I don't think Roberts will begin siding with the majority. spooky3 May 2013 #11

Mr. Nader was exercising his Constitutional right to run for office. rhett o rick May 2013 #12

You've brilliantly refuted the argument that Nader didn't have the right to run. Jim Lane May 2013 #62

The logic that Ralph Nader is to blame for our current mess is totally absurd. rhett o rick May 2013 #66

Yet another straw man. Jim Lane May 2013 #67

"I don't know of anyone -- any real live person -- who believes that "it's all Nader's fault." " rhett o rick May 2013 #70

you're a democrat? hypergrove May 2013 #22

Unfortunately for all of us, regret iamthebandfanman May 2013 #7

+1 JackN415 May 2013 #10

he voted against the Bush v. Gore decision --don't you know anything? CreekDog May 2013 #29

lmao iamthebandfanman May 2013 #45

"He's come to the realization" !???? BlueStreak May 2013 #8

yes, that writer is throwing his own spin (and ignorance) into that line. spooky3 May 2013 #13

His conscience is bothering him. He was a member of a SCOTUS that overstepped it's rhett o rick May 2013 #14

Why should Stevens' conscience be bothering him? markpkessinger May 2013 #37

That would be a question for him. It sounds like it to me. Maybe he doesnt think he did rhett o rick May 2013 #49

He was a dissenter, so I give him props for that Downtown Hound May 2013 #15

Beyond issuing a very strong dissent.... markpkessinger May 2013 #38

Gone on every news program, every pundit show, every talk show Downtown Hound May 2013 #58

That would have done nothing. The simple answer to that is... stevenleser May 2013 #79

I'm not saying it wouldn't have stood Downtown Hound May 2013 #80

Too fucking little too fucking late!!!!!! liberal N proud May 2013 #20

He strongly wrote and voted against that decision CreekDog May 2013 #34

The guy penned a stinging diessent at the time . . . markpkessinger May 2013 #36

way. way too little, too late. But never too late to put Bush behind bars. olddad56 May 2013 #55

I would say "political". bemildred May 2013 #21

Good lord - Hell Hath No Fury May 2013 #39

For those keeping score, responses in this thread are running 14 False and 17 True CreekDog May 2013 #40

The deficit in reading comprehension around here is embarrassing. RC May 2013 #50

It is just so bloody disheartening, is all I can say Hekate May 2013 #64

I know, sometimes it's like watching Faux news. freshwest May 2013 #65

The responses require a double face palm. In fact, I only wish I had more arms and hands so that... stevenleser May 2013 #77

He's right now and Duval May 2013 #42

Most of us on DU agreed with Stevens way back in 2000. And he is still right. JDPriestly May 2013 #46

He has "come to the realization"? After twelve years of deliberation? Orsino May 2013 #47

You do know that Stevens wrote the *dissenting* opinion in Bush v Gore, don't you? longship May 2013 #52

The words on that dissent sizzled with anger Samantha May 2013 #71

pre fox "news" republicans sigmasix May 2013 #72

the Supreme court should never had ruled in the vote lovuian May 2013 #61

Gee . . ya think? n/t Strelnikov_ May 2013 #73