izzybeans
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Aug-17-06 08:53 PM
Original message |
A quote worthy of my first sig. line. One no one should forget. |
|
Edited on Thu Aug-17-06 08:59 PM by izzybeans
On edit: added link-see page 40-see my sig. line as well http://www.mied.uscourts.gov/eGov/taylorpdf/06%2010204.pdfThis is the strong version of strict constructionism. The Constitution is a Progressive document. Don't let them steal it ever again.
|
NMDemDist2
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Aug-17-06 08:54 PM
Response to Original message |
tom_paine
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Aug-17-06 08:55 PM
Response to Original message |
izzybeans
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Aug-17-06 08:56 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
3. This is the strong version of strict constructionism. |
|
Edited on Thu Aug-17-06 08:57 PM by izzybeans
I think I may add this to the op.
|
tom_paine
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Aug-17-06 09:11 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
izzybeans
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Aug-17-06 09:18 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
5. Conservatives use the term strict constructionism like they have the |
|
market cornered. The judgement in the wiretapping case is telling them they are in fantasyland and that all things governmental even during war time must be constructed out of the cloth of the constituion, not a kings head.
I just wanted to point out that I'd be edited my orginal post to add that bit because it seems that when the rightwing go on the attack in the coming weeks, they will go after this judge with the "activist" meme. She articulated in her decision precisely what they think they mean, when in point of fact they are really playing King.
|
izzybeans
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Aug-18-06 06:40 AM
Response to Original message |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Wed Apr 24th 2024, 04:08 AM
Response to Original message |