kentuck
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jan-24-06 01:49 PM
Original message |
Repubs ask, what is the difference? |
|
We voted for Ginsburg knowing she was a liberal. So now, Alito is no more a conservative than Ginsburg was a liberal. So why do the Democrats vote against him? What's the difference, they ask?
Well, here's the difference. If Ruth Ginsburg had been the "swing vote" on the Supreme Court, you assholes would have filibustered her. Alito is the "swing vote" on the Supreme Court, so stop the nonsense and silly comparisons.
|
Richardo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jan-24-06 01:59 PM
Response to Original message |
1. The biggest difference: Clinton *consulted* with Hatch first... |
|
Edited on Tue Jan-24-06 02:11 PM by Richardo
Presented him with a list of candidates and asked which ones the GOP could support. Hatch indicated Ginsburg was one of them.
If Chimpy did that once in a while, he might see more bipartisanship, if he really cares to. My view is he doesn't give a shit WHAT the DEms think or do.
|
antonialee839
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jan-24-06 02:08 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
4. Exactly, he goes out of his way to be a little bastard. |
dogday
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jan-24-06 02:01 PM
Response to Original message |
2. Ginsburg admitted her position on Roe vs Wade |
|
Alito would not offer a position on anything. He was like a robot sitting there...
|
Touchdown
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jan-24-06 02:06 PM
Response to Original message |
3. Ginsberg isn't a liberal. |
|
Ginsberg is a moderate, as is Stephens, and Breyer. NOBODY on the Supreme Court is liberal, much less "as liberal" as Alito is conservative. There is nothing conservative about advocating autocracies.
|
zbdent
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jan-24-06 02:14 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
5. advocating autocracies is "conservative"q |
|
when you don't want to change the "status quo" - usually, dictatorships don't want to change the "status quo" - they don't want to lose their safety net.
The Conservatives in this country didn't want to lose their chance at a lordship in England in 1776 . . .
|
tnlefty
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jan-24-06 02:21 PM
Response to Original message |
6. Does Justice Ginsburg (then nominee) consider as "gospel" the theory of a |
|
unitary executive? No, and I don't notice that she's into pissin' on the Constitution either but I could've missed something.
|
sinkingfeeling
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jan-24-06 02:21 PM
Original message |
The big difference here is the fate of the United States! With Alito |
|
supporting the radical right's theory of 'unitarian executive', we will be turning the USA into a military dictatorship! Nothing of that importance was present when Ginsburg was seated on the Court!
|
sinkingfeeling
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jan-24-06 02:21 PM
Response to Original message |
|
Edited on Tue Jan-24-06 02:22 PM by sinkingfeeling
|
Ksec
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jan-24-06 02:23 PM
Response to Original message |
8. Because Conservative is simply an ideology that gives |
|
more wealth and power to the wealthy powerful few.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Thu Apr 25th 2024, 06:20 PM
Response to Original message |