Rick Perry Wants to Amend the Constitution for Supreme Court Term Limits

Strict constitutionalists want to change everything about it

PoliticsSeptember 2011 • Views: 26,168

Texas’s creationist governor Rick Perry really doesn’t like the US Constitution very much; he has a long list of changes and amendments he wants to make, starting with term limits on Supreme Court justices.

Washington - Rick Perry, like other conservatives, has lots of complaints about the Supreme Court: The justices, he says, have meddled in social policy, stepped on state power and generally run amok.

One solution the governor embraces is to end lifetime tenure — a cornerstone of the Constitution, whose drafters worried far less about activist or senile judges than about meddling tyrants and political pressure.

This is just one more example of extreme right wing cognitive dissonance; they fetishize the Constitution almost as much as the Bible, but want to change its most basic tenets.

Jump to bottom

116 comments

Samita Thu, Sep 1, 2011 9:24:27am

another check against Perry.

Going to be really grumbly if this year turns out to be
Obama v. Perry
and I have to hold my nose as much as
Kerry v. Bush

dragonfire1981 Thu, Sep 1, 2011 9:24:46am

I think he probably would prefer a whole new constitution.

wrenchwench Thu, Sep 1, 2011 9:24:53am

They already have term limits. They are only allowed one term. Unlike some governors I could think of.

Altermite Thu, Sep 1, 2011 9:27:22am

I really don’t get why Charles thinks this is unconstitutional. This is completely in line with the separation of power. That means it should be separated from anyone Perry disagrees with, right?

celticdragon Thu, Sep 1, 2011 9:28:09am

This is just one more example of extreme right wing cognitive dissonance; they fetishize the Constitution almost as much as the Bible, but want to change its most basic tenets.

Just like they claim to love America but despise half of the people living here.

Oh. that’s right…

All of those other people aren’t real Americans, so that doesn’t count.

laZardo Thu, Sep 1, 2011 9:29:51am

The Constitution is literally flexible in that it can be amended (both ways, unfortunately.) The Bible, not so much.

Mostly sane, most of the time. Thu, Sep 1, 2011 9:29:53am

The justice-for-life thing has worked pretty good until now.

Let’s keep it.

Gus Thu, Sep 1, 2011 9:30:45am

Why does Rick Perry hate our founding fathers?

jc717 Thu, Sep 1, 2011 9:31:08am

Well, in fairness, the US Constitution has a built in mechanism for modification. As long as the amendment process is followed, then one can argue that one is following/honoring the constitution even if proposing absurd changes. I have less problem with this then with things that clearly violate the constitution, yet are upheld and accepted by ‘conservatives’ (drug seizure laws, warrantless wiretapping of citizens, teaching creationism in public school, etc).

Ming Thu, Sep 1, 2011 9:31:44am

It is mind-boggling, and not in a good way, to contemplate any new amendments to the Constitution, or even worse, America’s going into a Constitutional Convention. Our politics is simply not up to it. For now, the Constitution is the key protection against America really going over the cliff.

celticdragon Thu, Sep 1, 2011 9:32:57am

I just looked at Perry’s plan. On the face of it, it isn’t as bad as I might have thought.

In the book, Perry only alludes to how he would change judicial tenure, referring to a plan that would stagger Supreme Court terms so there’s a retirement every two years. In that plan, justices would get 18-year terms, to ensure that no single president gets to pick a majority of the nine-member court.

thatthatisis Thu, Sep 1, 2011 9:35:21am

Let’s face it - the Republicans’ real problem with the Constitution is that it allows Democrats to hold office.

lawhawk Thu, Sep 1, 2011 9:36:53am

There have been calls for “term limits” on the Supreme Court for years. That’s not a new call. The effects of these limits would reduce the independence of the court from the political machinations that result when members are up for replacement/renomination.

But that’s precisely why Perry wants to see these changes.

And yet, this isn’t cognitive dissonance. The Constitution does provide a mechanism for amending the Constitution, and if he feels that strongly, let him try.

Thing is - it would fail miserably - like nearly all proposed Amendments.

lawhawk Thu, Sep 1, 2011 9:37:45am

re: #13 lawhawk

The cognitive dissonance is where Perry takes positions that are antithetical to the Constitution while claiming to uphold the constitution.

This isn’t one of them.

William of Orange Thu, Sep 1, 2011 9:37:54am

I’m almost where Perry is now. It’s about time to cast off Texas and say bye bye!! Just some cooky people over there.

Kragar Thu, Sep 1, 2011 9:38:03am

I remember civics class where we learned one of the principles behind the life time appointment was the idea that it would make the Judges less likely to be influenced by political pressures over job security.

Shiplord Kirel Thu, Sep 1, 2011 9:40:50am

What a coincidence. Thanks to Goodhair, who is now in his third full term plus half of W’s last one, many Texans are starting to favor term limits on the Governor’s office.

Killgore Trout Thu, Sep 1, 2011 9:44:26am

re: #16 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

I remember civics class where we learned one of the principles behind the life time appointment was the idea that it would make the Judges less likely to be influenced by political pressures over job security.

Socialist indoctrination from Radical Leftist Unionized public school teachers!

Gus Thu, Sep 1, 2011 9:44:41am

I’m sure Perry is thinking about Supreme Court justices Alito, Roberts, Scalia and Thomas when he voices this opinion.

Lidane Thu, Sep 1, 2011 9:47:28am

re: #17 Shiplord Kirel

What a coincidence. Thanks to Goodhair, who is now in his third full term plus half of W’s last one, many Texans are starting to favor term limits on the Governor’s office.

I’d love to see it. At this point, nothing short of term limits or Goodhair getting his ass handed to him by Obama in 2012 will get Rick Perry the hell out of the governor’s mansion.

HappyWarrior Thu, Sep 1, 2011 9:49:06am

And this isn’t “activism” how? Oh that’s right, it’s only activism if a liberal or Democrat does it and its for a position the right dislikes. Otherwise it’s fair game. I really don’t like this idea at all. The Supreme Court as currently constructed is fine the way it is. It was sleazy when FDR tried to change the constitutions so the court would fit his ideology and it’s sleazy for Perry to suggest the same.

Obdicut Thu, Sep 1, 2011 9:50:57am

re: #9 jc717

The Constitution exists both as a legal framework for government, and an embodiment of principles. As far as the first goes, you’re right that any amendment that goes through the process ahderes to the constitution. The second, however, is still important. Were someone to try to amend the constitution to remove, for example, the first amendment and replace it with an amendment stating that the US was a Christian nation and only Christian churches had religious freedom, that’s be a violation of its core principles.

Dark_Falcon Thu, Sep 1, 2011 9:51:31am

BBL

Gus Thu, Sep 1, 2011 9:51:57am

An 18 year limit would have put Scalia out on the street a long time ago. He’s been in the SCOTUS since 1986 or for 25 years. Thomas since 1991 or 20 years. But of course this isn’t about “conservative” justices. Perry and his ilk are obviously thinking about “liberal” justices. They probably don’t realize that such an amendment would have a negative impact on conservative justices and their opinions therein.

lgffan Thu, Sep 1, 2011 9:52:57am

As long as we are at it, let’s have one presidential term for six or seven years - no more worry about reelection. Maximum time a person can serve as a senator and congressman too - say 15 years or pick a number. No more congressional health care or retirement plan either. No more raises for congressmen. Major severe penalties for cheating the public as an elected official.

Obdicut Thu, Sep 1, 2011 9:53:26am

re: #24 Gus 802

It might also be a reaction to the idea that justices tend to become more ‘liberal’ the longer they sit on the bench— Scalia and Thomas being strong exceptions to that perception.

shutdown Thu, Sep 1, 2011 9:55:16am

With every utterance, and with every passage of his book read aloud to the public, Rick Perry becomes more and more a darling of the extreme right and blinkered GOP loyalists. At the same time, he is losing the independent swing vote he will need to win a general election. The entire GOP nomination process has become a party taking place in Rick Perry’s pants.

Amory Blaine Thu, Sep 1, 2011 9:55:23am

The GOP won’t dally if they control Washington. They’ll go balls out right wing.

HappyWarrior Thu, Sep 1, 2011 9:56:05am

re: #26 Obdicut

It might also be a reaction to the idea that justices tend to become more ‘liberal’ the longer they sit on the bench— Scalia and Thomas being strong exceptions to that perception.

True enough, Harry Blackmun was considered when Nixon nominated him to be in the mold of his fellow Minnesotan and friend, Warren Burger but he ended up on the court’s liberal bloc at the time of his retirement. Everyone knows Souter of course and how he was perceived to be a conservative. And of course Earl Warren and to a smaller degree, William Brennan who Eisenhower later regretted putting on the court. And there’s also John Paul Jones. Ford famously in the later years of his life defended Jones and his decision to put Jones on the court which is why I respect President Ford a lot.

Amory Blaine Thu, Sep 1, 2011 9:58:40am

re: #27 imp_62

With every utterance, and with every passage of his book read aloud to the public, Rick Perry becomes more and more a darling of the extreme right and blinkered GOP loyalists. At the same time, he is losing the independent swing vote he will need to win a general election. The entire GOP nomination process has become a party taking place in Rick Perry’s pants.

Yet alot of GOP extremists have been elected statewide recently. I don’t know that the independent vote is as centric as previously thought.

Gus Thu, Sep 1, 2011 9:58:44am

OT but related. It’s about Perry:

@ProPublica ProPublica
Perry’s admin gave a donor a permit for radioactive waste dump over objection of TX state officials: [Link: t.co…]

Gus Thu, Sep 1, 2011 9:59:14am

Damn. Perry’s a slime bucket.

makeitstop Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:01:08am

re: #32 Gus 802

Damn. Perry’s a slime bucket.

But…. he shot a coyote!
///

lawhawk Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:01:26am

re: #25 lgffan

There have been proposals to repeal the 22nd Amendment, relating to the Presidential term limits, including one that would create a single 6-year term.

None have gotten out of Congress for ratification among the states, which speaks to how difficult it is to amend the Constitution.

It further highlights why the makeup of the court is important since they get to interpret the laws on the books and the Constitution.

HappyWarrior Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:02:00am

re: #31 Gus 802

OT but related. It’s about Perry:

@ProPublica ProPublica
Perry’s admin gave a donor a permit for radioactive waste dump over objection of TX state officials: [Link: t.co…]

Just the man we want as president. Rick Perry: He likes radioactive waste more than he likes you.

HappyWarrior Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:03:57am

I’ve noticed that in some corners of the conservative movement both rank and file cons as well as prominent ones such as Perry and even Alan Keyes as far back as the Bush years who have promoted the repeal of the seventeenth amendment, direct election of Senators.

Amory Blaine Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:04:54am

IDK if term limits would accomplish anything positive with any branch. Just what the country needs. A bunch of freshmen running around with no party leadership and only lobbyists with veteran credentials.

Romantic Heretic Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:06:16am

Snicker. The last time the Republicans proposed term limits and succeeded was when they limited the Presidency to two terms. Mostly because they loathed FDR being in office for so long.

And surprise, surprise, surprise. The next Republican President, Eisenhower, was so popular that he could have, like FDR, stayed in office until the day he died.

Do the GOP ever think things through?

Lidane Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:08:35am

re: #25 lgffan

As long as we are at it, let’s have one presidential term for six or seven years - no more worry about reelection.

Because that’s worked out so well for Mexico.

HappyWarrior Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:09:02am

re: #38 Romantic Heretic

Snicker. The last time the Republicans proposed term limits and succeeded was when they limited the Presidency to two terms. Mostly because they loathed FDR being in office for so long.

And surprise, surprise, surprise. The next Republican President, Eisenhower, was so popular that he could have, like FDR, stayed in office until the day he died.

Do the GOP ever think things through?

Didn’t they try to repeal it with Reagan too? Half hearted but I think it happened. The funny thing is in the 40’s FDR was treated by Republicans like he was the only guy who tried to avoid the two term thing. When in reality, it was President Grant who tried to buck the trend first(He tried to run in 1880) and of course Teddy in 1912. I understand the logic behind term limits but on the other hand, I prefer having people in government who actually understand government rather than people who get elected with little understanding of it.

shutdown Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:09:05am

re: #30 Amory Blaine

Yet alot of GOP extremists have been elected statewide recently. I don’t know that the independent vote is as centric as previously thought.

The voters have been focusing on forcing certain issues towards resolution, n one hand, and in protest, on the other. I don’t think there will be a big protest vote in 2012. But voter turnout in general may be small, given disenchantment in the centre and on the left with BHO, and the inability of any candidate to capture the imagination of independents. There might be a centrist backlash if the GOP nominates a Perry or Bachmann; if Romney is nominated, he will win in the general election.

ProBosniaLiberal Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:10:08am

OT, but I found this:

Dennis Kucinich Would Make a Better Congressman in Libya than Washington State

Yesterday Al Jazeera discovered that carpetbagging Ohio Congressman Dennis Kucinich was actively involved with helping Libyan despot Muammar Gaddafi cling to power. Documents detailing attempted dirt-digging on the rebel movement—an idea apparently fostered by Kucinich—helped by were found strewn about a ruined Libyan spy center.

Page-worthy, you guys think?

I do think that Kucinich needs a Congressional reprimand. Maybe a Censure.

Obdicut Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:12:05am

re: #42 ProLifeLiberal

Er, I’m not going to defend Kucinich at all, but how on earth is he a carpetbagger?

iossarian Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:12:41am

re: #42 ProLifeLiberal

Beginning to look a leetle like KDS here.

Is Kucinich’s anti-war stance out of step with popular sentiment? Yes.

Is he allowed to hold an anti-war stance on Libya? Yes.

laZardo Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:16:46am

No US soldiers died in Iraq in August.

Huh.

Gus Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:17:12am

More Perry manure.

Rick Perry Backs AT&T Merger Plan With T-Mobile

Over the past decade, AT&T’s political action committee has given Perry more than $500,000, according to the Texas Ethics Commission’s records.

ProBosniaLiberal Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:17:13am

re: #43 Obdicut

He’s going to be moving to Washington, as his seat in Ohio will be disappearing. He’s going to try to run for office there.

re: #44 iossarian

His actions in trying to help a war criminal are il-liberal and pissed me off. If one is pro-human rights, you should be for this war. And the fact that he was acting like Qaddafi’s agent is the final straw.

albusteve Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:17:32am

Kucinich needs less attention, not more

ProBosniaLiberal Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:18:58am

re: #48 albusteve

I say the opposite. His lunatic views and underhanded dealings must be known the US at large, so everyone knows how slimy he is, and he won’t get elected again.

Amory Blaine Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:19:13am

re: #42 ProLifeLiberal

OT, but I found this:

Dennis Kucinich Would Make a Better Congressman in Libya than Washington State

Page-worthy, you guys think?

I do think that Kucinich needs a Congressional reprimand. Maybe a Censure.

Definitely pageworthy.

Obdicut Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:20:05am

re: #47 ProLifeLiberal

That’s a really bizarre use of ‘carpetbagging’ then. And you have not in any way demonstrated Kucinich was acting as Qaddafi’s ‘agent’. Every time you make that claim without proof, you damage your argument.

Gus Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:20:15am

re: #31 Gus 802

OT but related. It’s about Perry:

@ProPublica ProPublica
Perry’s admin gave a donor a permit for radioactive waste dump over objection of TX state officials: [Link: t.co…]

Paged:

Perry’s Texas Friends Find Donations Dovetail With Contracts

ProBosniaLiberal Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:24:37am

re: #51 Obdicut

If I’m not mistaken carpetbaggers were Northerners who moved south to get positions after the Civil War. It’s a bit of a stretch.

I’m saying he was Qaddafi’s agent because of the fact that he was trying to advocate for Qaddafi’s talking points here, along with the fact he was trying to injure the rebel cause here.

albusteve Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:25:42am

re: #49 ProLifeLiberal

I say the opposite. His lunatic views and underhanded dealings must be known the US at large, so everyone knows how slimy he is, and he won’t get elected again.

I don’t see it as much of an issue…you don’t know what his intention was or what was discussed…as for slimy, that’s typical

Surabaya Stew Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:26:54am

I’m not against ending lifetime tenure for SUpreme Court Justices. In fact, I would support a bi-partisian plan to ammend the constitution to either limit the length of time of service or to have the justices approved every 2 years for an 18 year term.

I certainly don’t think Perry is the best advocate for this, but he’s not wrong to suggest it. Of course, his intentions are pretty damn partisian, so this will only hurt and not help the chances of this ever happening.

HappyWarrior Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:26:55am

re: #53 ProLifeLiberal

If I’m not mistaken carpetbaggers were Northerners who moved south to get positions after the Civil War. It’s a bit of a stretch.

I’m saying he was Qaddafi’s agent because of the fact that he was trying to advocate for Qaddafi’s talking points here, along with the fact he was trying to injure the rebel cause here.

That’s the historical context of it. I’ve seen it used applied to any politician who moves to another state or district to run for office from Hilary Clinton to Alan Keyes. As for Kucinich, I need to read up on what happened before I damn the guy or not.

Obdicut Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:28:08am

re: #53 ProLifeLiberal

If I’m not mistaken carpetbaggers were Northerners who moved south to get positions after the Civil War. It’s a bit of a stretch.

It’s a huge stretch. they were there in the aftermath of a huge war, and they were on the conquering side. Though some of them were earnest and honest, many of them were exploitative, having no sympathy for the people of the region. In moving to Washington, Kucinich would actually be going to an even more progressive place than he is now, and be more among constituents who share his political views.

It’s not a stretch, it’s almost an inversion.

I’m saying he was Qaddafi’s agent because of the fact that he was trying to advocate for Qaddafi’s talking points here, along with the fact he was trying to injure the rebel cause here.

That does not make him Qaddafi’s agent. Do you think he was acting on the behest of Qaddafi? Did Qaddafi request he do something, and then Kucinich did that?

I have no problem saying Kucinich’s position on Libya is stupid, like most of his foreign policy, and detached from reality. But you’re making him out to be something a lot colder and, frankly, traitorous.

Amory Blaine Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:28:28am

re: #51 Obdicut

That’s a really bizarre use of ‘carpetbagging’ then. And you have not in any way demonstrated Kucinich was acting as Qaddafi’s ‘agent’. Every time you make that claim without proof, you damage your argument.

This part of the article stood out to me:

Kucinch’s record as mayor of Cleveland was highlighted by vicious infighting as his ideological vision clashed with the realities of running a city. The problems culminated when the city went into financial default and Kucinich was voted out after only two years in office.

Nowhere mentioned that he saved the city hundreds of millions of dollars.

Kragar Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:28:39am

re: #55 Surabaya Stew

I’m not against ending lifetime tenure for SUpreme Court Justices. In fact, I would support a bi-partisian plan to ammend the constitution to either limit the length of time of service or to have the justices approved every 2 years for an 18 year term.

I certainly don’t think Perry is the best advocate for this, but he’s not wrong to suggest it. Of course, his intentions are pretty damn partisian, so this will only hurt and not help the chances of this ever happening.

What you’re suggesting would give political parties an undue amount of influence over the judicial branch.

Alexzander Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:29:36am

re: #42 ProLifeLiberal

OT, but I found this:

Dennis Kucinich Would Make a Better Congressman in Libya than Washington State

Page-worthy, you guys think?

I do think that Kucinich needs a Congressional reprimand. Maybe a Censure.

If he deserves a censure, then do so McCain, Liberman and others who were attempting to sell arms to Libya a couple years ago.

shutdown Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:30:57am

re: #53 ProLifeLiberal

If I’m not mistaken carpetbaggers were Northerners who moved south to get positions after the Civil War. It’s a bit of a stretch.

I’m saying he was Qaddafi’s agent because of the fact that he was trying to advocate for Qaddafi’s talking points here, along with the fact he was trying to injure the rebel cause here.

I think that there was some internet buzz on this issue a day or two ago. You may want to do a bit more background research before making a page and taking a position. Also, caution using the phrase “rebel cause” - I doubt it can be properly defined, as there is some significant question as to the driving forces of the Libyan NTC and the future form of government. We can all agree that getting rid of Gaddafi is a political positive for most Libyans. But the economic future is cloudy and there is no guaranty that the NTC will not morph into an anti-West government.

Achilles Tang Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:31:03am

re: #43 Obdicut

Er, I’m not going to defend Kucinich at all, but how on earth is he a carpetbagger?

I suppose in a general sense, poorly, it is someone who tries to profit, politically or otherwise, from upheaval.

laZardo Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:31:16am

re: #60 Alexzander

If he deserves a censure, then do so McCain, Liberman and others who were attempting to sell arms to Libya a couple years ago.

We were (thinking of?) sponsoring them, then we changed our minds. Sounds like Iraq 1980.

Obdicut Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:32:07am

re: #62 Naso Tang

Yeah, but since Kucinich’s politics would be a natural fit in Washington, it really seems like the least-appropriate term to use.

Charleston Chew Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:32:36am

re: #2 dragonfire1981

I think he probably would prefer a whole new constitution.

This one, maybe?

jaunte Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:33:37am

re: #46 Gus 802

Perry is bringing ‘free enterprise’ back to government. Bidders, step right up.

Achilles Tang Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:33:42am

re: #64 Obdicut

I get the intended meaning. I’m not going to quibble over semantic correctness.

shutdown Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:33:45am

re: #62 Naso Tang

I suppose in a general sense, poorly, it is someone who tries to profit, politically or otherwise, from upheaval.

I am pretty sure the word for that would be “opportunist”. The definition of “carpetbagger” is pretty straightforward, and pertains solely to politicians who move to a district for the sole purpose of seeking elected office.

Achilles Tang Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:35:11am

re: #68 imp_62

and pertains solely to politicians who move to a district for the sole purpose of seeking elected office.

I hate to quibble when I said I wouldn’t, but I question that part.

Surabaya Stew Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:35:47am

re: #59 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

What you’re suggesting would give political parties an undue amount of influence over the judicial branch.

I would argue that as of this point, the 2 parties already have a pretty high level of influence over the judicial branch, and thats not likely to ever substantially change. What this would do is to even out and regulate the process, so that we don’t have this “Supreme Court Death Watch” or have justices serve longer than they are able to (Renquist) or than they want to (Souter).

Obdicut Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:36:08am

re: #68 imp_62

I’d say that’s been the usage in the media, and isn’t actually the meaning of the word.

We’re going to need separate dictionaries for the meaning of words as used by the media, and by people who, well, actually like language.

Charleston Chew Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:36:25am

re: #5 celticdragon

Just like they claim to love America but despise half of the people living here.

The 53% of Americans that believe same-sex marriage should be recognized by the law as valid, with the same rights as traditional marriages, for instance.

HappyWarrior Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:36:29am

Yeah the word has Reconstruction origins but it’s used for any politician that moves to another state or district that is not their own to run. As I said, I remember Hilary Clinton being called one when she ran for Senate in New York, happened to RFK too, and on the other side, Alan Keyes got it when he ran against Obama for hte Senate in 2004. Honest, I don’t know how to feel about it. Part of me finds it kinda sleazy and opportunistic but there’s also the flip side which is you do have the freedom of movement after all. Either way it’s not gonna affect me directly since I live in neither Ohio or Washington state so I won’t be affected by what Kucinich does.

ProBosniaLiberal Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:36:51am

re: #68 imp_62

Which is what Kucinich is attempting to do.

However, I found this on TPM

Steven Seagal And Arpaio Deputies Sued For Killing Puppy During Tank Raid On AZ Man’s Home

Actor and “Lawman” Steven Seagal is being sued for conducting a raid on an Arizona man’s home alongside deputies of Sheriff Joe Arpaio, which allegedly resulted in the accidental death of the man’s puppy.

Ummm, I need comments. I’m scratching my head on this one.

shutdown Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:37:19am

re: #69 Naso Tang

I hate to quibble when I said I wouldn’t, but I question that part.

[Link: dictionary.reference.com…]

You get second chair. You have to buy the first round, I’ll get the second :)

shutdown Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:38:03am

re: #71 Obdicut

[Link: dictionary.reference.com…]

I’m just following orders.

Amory Blaine Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:38:32am

re: #74 ProLifeLiberal

Which is what Kucinich is attempting to do.

However, I found this on TPM

Steven Seagal And Arpaio Deputies Sued For Killing Puppy During Tank Raid On AZ Man’s Home

Ummm, I need comments. I’m scratching my head on this one.

That’s so bizarre it’s hard to believe it’s real.

HappyWarrior Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:38:46am

re: #74 ProLifeLiberal

Which is what Kucinich is attempting to do.

However, I found this on TPM

Steven Seagal And Arpaio Deputies Sued For Killing Puppy During Tank Raid On AZ Man’s Home

Ummm, I need comments. I’m scratching my head on this one.

I read about that when it happened. My opinion? The sheriff of Manicopa County needs to stop being a diva who cares more about his “America’s Toughest Sheriff” image than actually doing shit. He’s also a huge birther. Seagal and Lou Ferrigino are both idiots too in this case.

Velvet Elvis Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:38:47am

If it gets rid of Alito faster it might be worth it.

Obdicut Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:38:50am

re: #76 imp_62

Right, but that includes the opportunistic and exploitative part, which would leave Kucinich out of it. He may be an ideologue with his head up his ass, but nobody doubts his sincerity.

laZardo Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:39:11am

re: #74 ProLifeLiberal

Steven Seagal personally went in and strangled the puppy to death. Then called it an accident.

///

Charleston Chew Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:39:22am

re: #6 laZardo

The Constitution is literally flexible in that it can be amended (both ways, unfortunately.) The Bible, not so much.

Conservatives don’t need to amend the Bible when they can just edit it: Conservative Bible Project

zora Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:40:05am

re: #64 Obdicut

the same could be said if sarah palin ran for a senate seat in arizona. while the politics fit. i would still call her a carpetbagger. same for clinton in ny. it’s the modern usage.

Velvet Elvis Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:40:20am

re: #62 Naso Tang

I suppose in a general sense, poorly, it is someone who tries to profit, politically or otherwise, from upheaval.

He’s looking to move to Washington state and run for congress from there if his seat gets eliminated, supposedly. It’s just a rumor.

HappyWarrior Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:40:33am

re: #82 Charleston Chew

Conservatives don’t need to amend the Bible when they can just edit it: Conservative Bible Project

That’s the best thing I’ve ever seen. Hmmm we pride ourselves as biblical fundamentalists but let’s edit the parts of the Bible we don’t like. Oh conservapedia how thou amuse me.

Amory Blaine Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:41:14am

Arpaio and Seagal. Together. At Last. Taking Revenge.

Charleston Chew Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:43:53am

re: #16 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

I remember civics class where we learned one of the principles behind the life time appointment was the idea that it would make the Judges less likely to be influenced by political pressures over job security.

I guarantee that if justices had term limits, you see them ruling in favor of what ever company was going to give them a lucrative job after they retire. Members of the other branches of government do it, so I assume justices wouldn’t be above it.

shutdown Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:44:17am

re: #80 Obdicut

Right, but that includes the opportunistic and exploitative part, which would leave Kucinich out of it. He may be an ideologue with his head up his ass, but nobody doubts his sincerity.

Agreed. I rarely think about him at all, btw.

Surabaya Stew Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:44:23am

re: #79 Conservative Moonbat

If it gets rid of Alito faster it might be worth it.

It would (assuming that it can be made to apply retroactivly), but it would also get rid of Ginsberg and other Liberals faster; hence the double-edged sword nature of this.

Obdicut Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:44:38am

Final historical side note: Many of the carpetbaggers were very decent men whose sole problem was actually beleiving in the equality of the races.

A politician in South Carolina who was called a carpetbagger was Daniel Henry Chamberlain, a New Englander who had served as an officer of a predominantly black regiment of the United States Colored Troops. He was appointed South Carolina’s attorney general from 1868 to 1872 and was elected Republican governor from 1874 to 1877. As a result of the national Compromise of 1877, Chamberlain lost his office. He was narrowly re-elected in a campaign marked by egregious voter fraud and violence against freedmen by Democratic Red Shirts, who succeeded in suppressing the black vote in some majority-black counties. While serving in South Carolina, Chamberlain was a strong supporter of Negro rights.

shutdown Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:44:41am

re: #86 Amory Blaine

Arpaio and Seagal. Together. At Last. Taking Revenge.

This time, it’s puppersonal

Feline Fearless Leader Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:46:02am

re: #61 imp_62

I think that there was some internet buzz on this issue a day or two ago. You may want to do a bit more background research before making a page and taking a position. Also, caution using the phrase “rebel cause” - I doubt it can be properly defined, as there is some significant question as to the driving forces of the Libyan NTC and the future form of government. We can all agree that getting rid of Gaddafi is a political positive for most Libyans. But the economic future is cloudy and there is no guaranty that the NTC will not morph into an anti-West government.

Sort of interesting how we advocate self-determination all the time up to the point that they appear to not support our interests above what might be their own…
/

Kragar Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:46:26am

re: #91 imp_62

This time, it’s puppersonal

Be scared, be very ascared.

ProBosniaLiberal Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:46:53am

re: #77 Amory Blaine

That’s what I thought too.

Kragar Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:47:06am

re: #87 Charleston Chew

I guarantee that if justices had term limits, you see them ruling in favor of what ever company was going to give them a lucrative job after they retire. Members of the other branches of government do it, so I assume justices wouldn’t be above it.

Bingo.

HappyWarrior Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:48:09am

re: #90 Obdicut

Final historical side note: Many of the carpetbaggers were very decent men whose sole problem was actually beleiving in the equality of the races.

Yep, this. I’ve honestly felt admiration for the radical Republicans since I realized just how progressive for their time on racial issues they were. And Charles Sumner was one tough sob, gets caned by Preston Brooks and then becomes among the Senate’s strongest abolitionists.

Feline Fearless Leader Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:48:24am

re: #73 HappyWarrior

Yeah the word has Reconstruction origins but it’s used for any politician that moves to another state or district that is not their own to run. As I said, I remember Hilary Clinton being called one when she ran for Senate in New York, happened to RFK too, and on the other side, Alan Keyes got it when he ran against Obama for hte Senate in 2004. Honest, I don’t know how to feel about it. Part of me finds it kinda sleazy and opportunistic but there’s also the flip side which is you do have the freedom of movement after all. Either way it’s not gonna affect me directly since I live in neither Ohio or Washington state so I won’t be affected by what Kucinich does.

Aren’t the residency requirements for running for public office in a state, including the US House and Senate controled by the individual states? So if they wanted to prevent this situation they can do so on their own accord?

shutdown Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:49:44am

re: #92 oaktree

Sort of interesting how we advocate self-determination all the time up to the point that they appear to not support our interests above what might be their own…
/

Don’t take my comment the wrong way. I am all for self-determination, no matter the outcome (almost - iImake exceptions for rigged elections and Hamas). But there is a built-in bias in the US towards assuming that rebels are somehow pro-Western and that democracy always leads to rational politics. I am not quite ready to take up the “rebel cause” - I am still sorting out the true effects of Tahrir Square. So far, Egypt has swapped military dictatorship fronted by Mubarak for direct military dictatorship and islamic populism.

recusancy Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:50:42am

re: #87 Charleston Chew

I guarantee that if justices had term limits, you see them ruling in favor of what ever company was going to give them a lucrative job after they retire. Members of the other branches of government do it, so I assume justices wouldn’t be above it.

Hasn’t really stopped Thomas and his wife.

100

shutdown Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:51:53am

I am thinking of changing my quote in my lgf user information box. How about: “I hate confrontation, unless somebody tells me not to”

101

Feline Fearless Leader Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:51:59am

re: #98 imp_62

Don’t take my comment the wrong way. I am all for self-determination, no matter the outcome (almost - iImake exceptions for rigged elections and Hamas). But there is a built-in bias in the US towards assuming that rebels are somehow pro-Western and that democracy always leads to rational politics. I am not quite ready to take up the “rebel cause” - I am still sorting out the true effects of Tahrir Square. So far, Egypt has swapped military dictatorship fronted by Mubarak for direct military dictatorship and islamic populism.

I concur. (And I did not take your comment as advocating against self-determiniation, just used it as the springboard to make the observation I made.)

102

HappyWarrior Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:52:13am

re: #97 oaktree

Aren’t the residency requirements for running for public office in a state, including the US House and Senate controled by the individual states? So if they wanted to prevent this situation they can do so on their own accord?

Yeah, I’m pretty sure that they do. I think it’s only something that bothers people if it’s someone that they don’t like. That is to say I don’t think New York Democrats were too upset when Hilary and RFK ran there. New York Republicans on the other hand.

103

Feline Fearless Leader Thu, Sep 1, 2011 10:54:47am

re: #102 HappyWarrior

Yeah, I’m pretty sure that they do. I think it’s only something that bothers people if it’s someone that they don’t like. That is to say I don’t think New York Democrats were too upset when Hilary and RFK ran there. New York Republicans on the other hand.

Though I do wonder if a state set up draconian residency requirements whether there would eventually be a court challenge to it based on 14th Amendment grounds. I suspect that there would be an underlying hazy line of reasonable requirements to establish residency and eligibility to run for office in a locale.

104

Obdicut Thu, Sep 1, 2011 11:18:11am

re: #103 oaktree

Let’s force everyone in the US to move states every year. That’ll solve it.

105

Idle Drifter Thu, Sep 1, 2011 11:26:09am

I’m glad our constitution not only has the ability to change but has the safe guards in place that would assure no one party could alter the constitution on a whim or with a 50.1% majority of the vote. That it would take a monumental force of political change to change it. Good thing too considering we’ve only had one disastrous amendment, the 18th, that was rectified by the 21st.

106

lawhawk Thu, Sep 1, 2011 11:26:29am

UN finds Israeli naval blockade legal, but faults the raid, claiming it was “excessive and unreasonable.”

It’s another one of those but-for situations.

But for Palestinian terrorism, Israel would not have needed to impose a blockade, let alone carry out a raid to thwart pro-terrorist sympathizers from running it to Israel’s security detriment.

It was not unreasonable for the Israelis to carry out the raid, and once the raiding party came under attack, the use of force was more than reasonable.

107

Killgore Trout Thu, Sep 1, 2011 11:27:23am

re: #106 lawhawk

UN finds Israeli naval blockade legal, but faults the raid, claiming it was “excessive and unreasonable.”

It’s another one of those but-for situations.

But for Palestinian terrorism, Israel would not have needed to impose a blockade, let alone carry out a raid to thwart pro-terrorist sympathizers from running it to Israel’s security detriment.

It was not unreasonable for the Israelis to carry out the raid, and once the raiding party came under attack, the use of force was more than reasonable.

Another shockingly stupid UN report.

108

Feline Fearless Leader Thu, Sep 1, 2011 11:27:48am

re: #104 Obdicut

Let’s force everyone in the US to move states every year. That’ll solve it.

//

Oh, a big lottery. And if you draw a high enough number you have to move to Texas or Alaska?
//

Interesting way to get money flowing to the moving companies and real estate firms. Would also put an interesting pressure on school districts as well.

109

Vicious Babushka Thu, Sep 1, 2011 11:29:24am

re: #107 Killgore Trout

Another shockingly stupid UN report.

Is there any other kind?

110

lawhawk Thu, Sep 1, 2011 11:30:25am

re: #107 Killgore Trout

The report is particularly harsh about the IHH, which organized the flotilla, but the fact that the UN had to issue a report about a sovereign nation’s inalienable right to defend itself shows the farcical nature of the Arab-Israeli conflict.

It should have been self-evident that Israel had the right to stop the blockade and to protect itself. Deaths resulting from the stop should be on the IHH, not Israel. But the report lays blame on Israel for not giving sufficient warnings and using too much force (as though the terrorists on board were not willing to use deadly force themselves - as viewed in the videos and photos taken before and during the raid).

111

makeitstop Thu, Sep 1, 2011 11:35:05am

OT: Gibson CEO Henry Juszkiewicz goes crying to Glenn Beck.

The day that Gibson gives Henry the old heave-ho will be the day I start buying new Gibsons again. It probably won’t happen in my lifetime, though.

112

sagehen Thu, Sep 1, 2011 12:42:21pm

re: #102 HappyWarrior

Yeah, I’m pretty sure that they do. I think it’s only something that bothers people if it’s someone that they don’t like. That is to say I don’t think New York Democrats were too upset when Hilary and RFK ran there. New York Republicans on the other hand.

They were invited, with great enthusiasm, by the state party. “Pleasepleaseplease, c’mon, we’re looking for someone just like you!!”

Of course, that’s also what the Illinois Republicans said to Allen Keyes, and it didn’t work out so well for him…

113

RadicalModerate Thu, Sep 1, 2011 12:55:10pm

re: #111 makeitstop

OT: Gibson CEO Henry Juszkiewicz goes crying to Glenn Beck.

The day that Gibson gives Henry the old heave-ho will be the day I start buying new Gibsons again. It probably won’t happen in my lifetime, though.

The more that I read about this story, and how Gibson has been attempting to subevert the import laws, the more I am convinced that if Les Paul were alive today, he would respectfully request that Gibson remove his name from his line of guitars manufactured by them.

114

JamesWI Thu, Sep 1, 2011 1:17:42pm

Haven’t read every comment here, so I don’t know if this has been posted yet. Here’s a story I saw a while back: Seven Ways Rick Perry Wants to Change the Constitution, including:

- Making Supreme Court decisions subject to veto by two-thirds of Congress (Seriously, not making this shit up. He wants to give Congress the power to decide whether the laws passed by Congress are Constitutional).

- Repeal the 17th Amendment, and go back to having the state legislatures elect the Senate, rather than a vote by the people (because democracy is hard!)

115

im_gumby_damnit Thu, Sep 1, 2011 8:20:10pm

That’s what we really need to do right now. Further politicize the judiciary. Brilliant.

116

Pacific moderate Thu, Sep 1, 2011 11:13:12pm

I’m actually sympathetic to having term limits for the Supreme Court, albeit of the longer variety, maybe 15 or 20 years. We’re now seeing presidents pack the court with young mediocrities like Thomas, Roberts and Kagen, Justices that they expect to live a long time and write and vote predictably.

I guarantee that I haven’t travelled the same road as Gov. Perry to reach this conclusion though.

Spy Mode Auto

This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Rick Perry Wants to Amend the Constitution for Supreme Court Term Limits

► LGF Headlines

► Top 10 Comments

► Bottom Comments

► Recent Comments

► Tools/Info

► Tag Cloud