Rudy repeats justices call

--NSMSNBC — Fri, 16 Nov 2007 22:25:13 GMT

I dislike the term 'strict constructionalist.' In practice, it ironically has nothing to do with strictly judging the text as it is written and no further. In reality, it is merely a synonym for 'strict conservative,' which offers no guarantees to our precious Constitution.

Rudy repeats justices call

--NSMSNBC — Fri, 16 Nov 2007 22:30:19 GMT

It was loosely mentioned here. Why do Republicans support federalism in the U.S. but not in Iraq? To the contrary, Iraq is a divided country, and the last time I checked we are all Americans, Mississippi and Maine included. National problems require national solutions, federalism is a cop-out.

Rudy repeats justices call

John B, Des Moines, IA — Fri, 16 Nov 2007 22:36:42 GMT

How many judicial appointments did the GOP put secret holds on? Almost 300 as I recall. Whining about not rubberstamping appointees is nonsense.

Rudy repeats justices call

Steve Turner Cedar Falls Iowa — Fri, 16 Nov 2007 23:41:33 GMT

"...could you use a good lawyer?" "I could use a good Judge." -Conversation between Mattie Ross(Kim Darby) and 'Lucky' Ned Pepper(Robert Duvall), in 'True Grit'.

Rudy repeats justices call

Rick, WS, NC — Sat, 17 Nov 2007 00:14:57 GMT

rudy is going from americas mayoral failure to running for prez and congress...does anyone really take this clown seriously?

Rudy repeats justices call

Dan H., Broomfield, Colorado — Sat, 17 Nov 2007 04:34:04 GMT

Strict constructionist is nothing but code for judges that agree with someone has for a position. Do these people really want to count Indians as 3/5s of a person? The Constitution recognizes slavery as well. Other than a few red neck does anyone honestly think we should reinstitute slavery? Corporations aren't persons under the Constitution yet because of a footnote in a Supreme Court ruling, a corporation is treated as if it were a person. Do the "strict constructionist really want judges to intrepret the Constitution exactly as written? I seriously doubt it. Seems to me Rudy is just selling snake oil to the ignorant morons he knows will buy it.

Rudy repeats justices call

Randy Quent, San Diego CA — Sat, 17 Nov 2007 05:45:36 GMT

Nice move Rudy. He's my man!!

Rudy repeats justices call

Rufus Gibbons, DC — Sat, 17 Nov 2007 11:07:09 GMT

Keep talking Rudy what else will you try to change in your utopia.

Rudy repeats justices call

Jan, Nashua, NH — Sat, 17 Nov 2007 12:19:28 GMT

What our Founders wanted ALWAYS was a balance of power.
One of the most obvious ways Bush has stolen that balance of power is through the Judiciary Branch.

The advice and ***CONSENT*** of the Senate puts the Constitutional oversight of the Judiciary in the hands of the SENATE. The Senate vote BB (Before Bush) was 67%.
Bush demanded that the GOP Senate make it only 51%.

If every vote for a judge was still 67 votes, the Executive branch would not be controlling the Judical Branch of our government.

Call your Senators today and ask that, in an effort to restore balance in our government, they restore the 67 vote rule. No matter which party you are from, our Judicial Branch would be taken out of the hands of our Executive Branch and put back into the hands of a super majority (almost never just one Party).

If this rule doesn't get changed under Bush, then it won't change under Clinton either.
Bottom line...
Do you want advice and CONSENT for our Judiciary to come from the majority in the Senate body, or do you want the President to pick his own Judicial Branch and continue to destroy the balance of power?

Call your Senators (both R and D) and demand that they restore the balance of power that our Forefathers gave to We the People through our representative government.

Rudy repeats justices call

Shadow, Hamden, CT — Sat, 17 Nov 2007 15:17:42 GMT

No matter who the Republicans pick to try and get crossover votes, whether it be Huckabee (economic positions with a mainstream appeal), Paul (foreign policy positions with a mainstream appeal), or Giuliani (social positions with a mainstream appeal), the fact is ALL of them have vowed to appoint Supreme Court Justices that would likely overturn Roe vs. Wade within the next President's term. It is a reasonable question to ask whether - putting aside all the security, fiscal, and corruption crises Republicans are going to be held accountable for - a candidate with such intentions could even win a general election.

Rudy repeats justices call

T. Bowen, Albany NY — Sat, 17 Nov 2007 16:41:33 GMT

//start
I dislike the term 'strict constructionalist.' In practice, it ironically has nothing to do with strictly judging the text as it is written and no further. In reality, it is merely a synonym for 'strict conservative,' which offers no guarantees to our precious Constitution.
//end

Being a 'strict constructionalist' has its not so good moments, but it's better then the liberals solution of just making crap up as we go along.

Rudy repeats justices call

Mr. Warmth, Valencia, Ca — Sat, 17 Nov 2007 19:12:04 GMT

So a pro-choice republican will appoint strict constructionist judges and doesn't see that as a contradiction? Just how does he think those judges in the mold of Scalia will handle abortion cases when they reach their benches? Rudy is one hypocritical fool.

Rudy repeats justices call

jimmy ragland — Sat, 17 Nov 2007 19:20:39 GMT

The mosr ACTIVIST judges on the present Supreme Court are the so-called Conservative ones...Check their Records!!

Rudy repeats justices call

Chris Watts — Sun, 18 Nov 2007 06:34:13 GMT

Rudy has no business talking about the consitution, when it's obvious he doesn't care about it.

In my opinion, Rudy is hands down the most mis-leading and evil candidate on the republican side.

There's that shady business of his law firm lobbying for Fox News. He's an authoritarian, he cares nothing for anybodies' civil liberties. His own family can't even stand behind him. He also wants to expand and further the already disasterous war that's been going on without end for years.

On top of that and worst of all-- He uses the memory of a tragedy to further his political career.

Rudy is so far removed from good taste and the consitution it offends me.

Rudy repeats justices call

"Bud" Spencer — Sun, 18 Nov 2007 06:38:20 GMT

Rudy is just another Republican hypocritacal fool!

Rudy repeats justices call

justthefacts — Sun, 18 Nov 2007 13:50:27 GMT

Indeed, we need both a democratic super-majority in Congress and a democratic POTUS to prevent more neocon appointments to the Supreme Court - now we have 5 judges that vote in lock-step to force conservative agenda, operating in much the same fashion as the remainder of the GOP in Congress.

There is no diversity of thought, word, or deed whatsoever in today's GOP - and in effect with the recent GOP minority you have obstructionist rather that constructionist government - that is, blocking all legislative efforts to enact moderate law initiatives that would in any way impact extant neocon foreign or domestic policy.

Since recent changes in the balance of Congress, Bush has maintained his neocon agenda through the power of the veto - ably assisted by his single-minded obstructionist GOP allies in Congress.

There is nothing that Guiliani or any other GOP candidate would (or could) do to change the ultra-conservative trends we've seen in judicial appointments since Bush. Once in the Whitehouse Guiliani's so-called moderate tendencies on various social issues would disappear like smoke. Guililani is totally indebted politically to ultra-conservative factions and the more so if elected.

Rudy repeats justices call

Opa2 — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 06:22:58 GMT

Where was Rudy when we needed him? As I recall, not many judges made it past the republicans during the last six yrats of the clinton Administaration. Some 350 never got a vote during that time for all levels of appointments because some old coot from the South did not like their philosophy. Never heard of Rudy at that time!

Rudy repeats justices call

GW1970 — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 14:57:22 GMT

Rudy, no family values, Guiliani claims to support a woman's right to choose. At the same time, he plans to nominate justices like Scalia and Thomas who will vote to overturn Roe. A little contradiction there, Rudy.

Rudy repeats justices call

Ken Collins/ Wagoner, Oklahoma — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 15:22:03 GMT

Hillary clinton, rudy guiliani and Mcain should all move to Iraq and run Bush's country for him !!!
It's for darn sure they have forgotten about America and her needs !!!!!