TwitterFacebook

Newt’s Odd Understanding of the US Constitution

Or, let’s just ignore the Supreme Court’s rulings if the right person is in the White House
LGF • Views: 19,858

Newt Gingrich claims to be a historian but his understanding of US history and the US Constitution leave much to be desired. His latest musings about judicial review and whether a President has the right to simply ignore a Supreme Court ruling are quite disturbing.

Frankly, Gingrich claims that he wouldn’t be compelled to follow the Supreme Court’s rulings on constitutional law questions. But, when asked whether President Obama could ignore a potential Court ruling the health care reform law as unconstitutional, he declined to say that Obama had that right - saying only that the president can ignore the Court’s rulings only in extraordinary situations.

But if we apply Gingrich’s own supposed standard for presidential review to the health care question, President Obama could simply declare the issue to be extraordinary and ignore the court’s ruling. The howls that would come from the GOP and the conservative base that Gingrich is courting in the 2012 election season would never be louder than if the President simply ignored a court ruling the health care law was unconstitutional because the President simply thought that the health care law was an extraordinary situation. Gingrich would probably be the first to claim that President Obama should be impeached for ignoring the Court.

It’s complete malarkey. What this is about is that Gingrich wants to override decisions he doesn’t like from the bench, all while ignoring 200+ years of judicial review by the courts on the constitutionality of the issues at hand.

Throw in his musings about same sex marriage, and you’ve got yet another GOP candidate who would throw judicial review under the bus.

Jump to bottom

263 comments

1 jaunte  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:11:23am

Gingrich on Face the Nation:

SCHIEFFER: One of the things you say is that if you don’t like what a court has done, that Congress should subpoena the judge and bring him before Congress and hold a Congressional hearing… how would you enforce that? Would you send the Capitol Police down to arrest him?

GINGRICH: Sure. If you had to. Or you’d instruct the Justice Department to send a U.S. Marshal.

Video at the link:
Newt Gingrich Would Send U.S. Marshals To Arrest ‘Activist’ Judges

2 darthstar  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:15:05am

We were due for a Newt thread. ///

Mornin' Charles.

3 Obdicut  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:18:33am

Newt has different rules for President Newt than other presidents.

4 Kronocide  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:18:49am
When your reasons for believing something are justified ad hoc, you are left susceptible to further discoveries undermining the rationale for that belief.

Neil deGrasse Tyson

5 darthstar  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:19:22am
6 Lidane  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:20:14am

On a related note, even George W. Bush's AG's think Newt is insane for his statements about arresting judges and ignoring the courts:

Former Bush Attorneys General Slam Gingrich’s ‘Ridiculous,’ ‘Irresponsible,’ ‘Outrageous,’ and ‘Dangerous’ Courts Plan

7 Obdicut  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:23:35am

re: #1 jaunte

Wow, so he thinks presidents can ignore judges and Congress can arrest them.

8 jaunte  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:24:20am

Imagine the howling if Congress tried to hold a hearing about Supreme Court justices being honorees and speakers at a Federalist Society dinner.

9 Gus  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:24:30am

To heck with judicial review. Let's bring executive supremacy and colonialism to America and be more like it was before the American Revolution. -- King Gingrich I.

//And it would even come with an official state church.

10 Simply Sarah  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:25:21am

To be complete honest, I'm utterly terrified that Newt continues to press this issue. It may not be a winner right now, but it's incredibly dangerous for (supposedly) credible candidates to be saying this sort of thing. It legitimizes the concept and I see a huge risk of it catching on as a right wing position, beyond the existing grumbling about activist judges.

If the GOP, or even just large sections of it, were to endorse this reasoning and decide it's OK to ignore rulings they didn't like, we could quickly end up on a fast track to the complete breakdown of the rule of law in the United States and, as a result, a complete breakdown of the United States as we know it.

This cannot become mainstream. If that were to to happen, it would be a disaster beyond anything you can imagine.

11 Killgore Trout  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:25:22am
12 Lidane  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:27:35am

re: #11 Killgore Trout

For fuck's sake: House leader rejects Senate payroll tax plan

You expected anything else from the clown circus known as the House GOP?

13 Simply Sarah  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:28:05am

re: #11 Killgore Trout

For fuck's sake: House leader rejects Senate payroll tax plan

Not surprised. They were talking about doing that. And why shouldn't they? The Democrats have shown a willingness to basically gradually cave on any issue they get pushed hard enough on, so the House leadership is going to attempt to squeeze as much as they can out of this.

14 b_sharp  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:29:51am

re: #4 BigPapa

Neil deGrasse Tyson

Neil deGrasse Tyson for president.

15 HappyWarrior  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:30:05am

re: #1 jaunte

Gingrich on Face the Nation:

Video at the link:
Newt Gingrich Would Send U.S. Marshals To Arrest ‘Activist’ Judges

He thinks marshals should arrest judges whose rulings he doesn't like? Wow that is telling.

16 Gretchen G.Tiger  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:31:00am

When he made that statement about reinterpreting the 14th amendment regarding Abortion and circumventing the Constitution all together with an Act of Congress, I got shivers down my spine.

He really wants to be King.

17 Killgore Trout  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:31:09am

re: #12 Lidane

You expected anything else from the clown circus known as the House GOP?

They were given everything they wanted in the "compromise". I didn't expect them to invent new demands.

18 Gretchen G.Tiger  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:31:50am

re: #15 HappyWarrior

He thinks marshals should arrest judges whose rulings he doesn't like? Wow that is telling.

If he doesn't like them, they are (by logical progression) wrong.

Don't you get it?

All Hail!

/gah

19 Kronocide  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:31:59am

Too early for the oft ill used terms such as 'fascist' or 'dictator?'

This is really freaky stuff, Crazy Uncle grade nuttery.

20 dragonfire1981  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:32:00am

There really should be stricter minimum qualifications for someone who wants to run for President.

21 Simply Sarah  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:33:41am

re: #17 Killgore Trout

They were given everything they wanted in the "compromise". I didn't expect them to invent new demands.

In retrospect, that was probably a bit naïve.

22 Gus  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:33:58am
23 Lidane  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:34:11am

re: #17 Killgore Trout

They were given everything they wanted in the "compromise". I didn't expect them to invent new demands.

Of course they're going to invent new demands. They're the House GOP. Obama could give Boehner and Cantor everything they wanted on a silver platter and have it delivered by a group of Victoria's Secret supermodels and they'd still demand more.

Their whole raison d'être is to be obstructionist assholes. What else did you expect?

24 HappyWarrior  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:34:45am

I mean Newt's crap is totally diffnt re: #22 Gus 802

King Gingrich I

Tzar Newt the Terrible.

25 Gretchen G.Tiger  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:34:49am

re: #22 Gus 802

King Gingrich I

That jacket is too small for him

26 HappyWarrior  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:35:33am

If Obama's team is smart they run against a do nothing Congress like Truman did.

27 Gus  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:36:03am

re: #25 ggt

That jacket is too small for him

Since that day we've called him "Gingrich Toes."

//

28 b_sharp  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:37:15am

re: #20 dragonfire1981

There really should be stricter minimum qualifications for someone who wants to run for President.

They should have to qualify for a CCW.

29 Gretchen G.Tiger  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:37:38am

re: #28 b_sharp

They should have to qualify for a CCW.

They do as soon as they take the oath of office.

30 Gretchen G.Tiger  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:38:18am

I honestly think the newster has delusions of grandeur.

31 Lidane  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:38:27am

re: #10 Simply Sarah

If the GOP, or even just large sections of it, were to endorse this reasoning and decide it's OK to ignore rulings they didn't like, we could quickly end up on a fast track to the complete breakdown of the rule of law in the United States and, as a result, a complete breakdown of the United States as we know it.

Republicans are the law and order party. Democrats are the party of activist judges.

Why do you hate America?

///

32 S'latch  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:39:05am

If a president refuses to follow a Supreme Court decision, I think we have to rely on Congress to act.

In 1956, the Supreme Court declared segregated busing unconstitutional. Montgomery was integrated by court order as a result, but Eisenhower ignored the ruling and allowed segregation to continue in other places. This continued until Congress passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

33 lawhawk  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:39:32am

re: #26 HappyWarrior

That's probably under consideration. The ads pretty much write themselves. Obama can simply say that he and Congressional Democrats continue to present bipartisan legislation and compromise repeatedly only to have obstructionist Republicans in the House block negotiated efforts. One can't fix the nation's problems when one party refuses to act, no matter how pressing the issue.

BTW, thanks Charles for promoting this to the front page. Gingrich really has no idea what can of worms he's opening up down the road because it would be a massive expansion of presidential power and a significant cut in power of the judiciary, which necessarily rules to determine the constitutionality of actions of the other branches.

34 Gretchen G.Tiger  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:40:21am

re: #33 lawhawk

That's probably under consideration. The ads pretty much write themselves. Obama can simply say that he and Congressional Democrats continue to present bipartisan legislation and compromise repeatedly only to have obstructionist Republicans in the House block negotiated efforts. One can't fix the nation's problems when one party refuses to act, no matter how pressing the issue.

BTW, thanks Charles for promoting this to the front page. Gingrich really has no idea what can of worms he's opening up down the road because it would be a massive expansion of presidential power and a significant cut in power of the judiciary, which necessarily rules to determine the constitutionality of actions of the other branches.

He knows, and he wants that power all to himself.

35 b_sharp  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:40:24am

re: #29 ggt

They do as soon as they take the oath of office.

See last thread.

36 Daniel Ballard  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:40:48am

re: #11 Killgore Trout

For fuck's sake: House leader rejects Senate payroll tax plan

It's upside down world.

37 darthstar  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:40:54am

re: #26 HappyWarrior

If Obama's team is smart they run against a do nothing Congress like Truman did.

If Obama's team is smart they'll pretend the GOP is outsmarting them for another three months or so...

38 Gretchen G.Tiger  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:40:54am

re: #35 b_sharp

See last thread.

decided to stay out of that one.

39 Gretchen G.Tiger  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:42:56am

See, Kings, in Western History have been *special* in the eye's of G-d. Being King would only confirm his divinity.

The man is as looney toons as the rest of the GOP candidates.

40 Simply Sarah  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:43:15am

re: #33 lawhawk

BTW, thanks Charles for promoting this to the front page. Gingrich really has no idea what can of worms he's opening up down the road because it would be a massive expansion of presidential power and a significant cut in power of the judiciary, which necessarily rules to determine the constitutionality of actions of the other branches.

I continue to stand by position that by simply taking this stance publicly, Newt is courting disaster by risking having segments of the voting public take this seriously.

41 Lidane  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:43:17am

re: #34 ggt

He knows, and he wants that power all to himself.

EXACTLY. Newt knows damn well what he's saying and what it would mean, and he wants that power for himself.

He'll also be the first one to squeal like a stuck pig as soon as a Democrat uses the same power.

42 Renaissance_Man  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:44:14am

Let's not forget that in yet another example of cult projection, Obama is the tyrannical, arrogant, megalomaniacal dictator who wants absolute power.

The problem, of course, is that it's not just the cult that believes elements of this.

43 Lidane  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:44:21am

re: #40 Simply Sarah

I continue to stand by position that by simply taking this stance publicly, Newt is courting disaster by risking having segments of the voting public take this seriously.

That's just it -- he doesn't care. If it wins him votes with the idiots and rubes and wins the GOP nomination for him, that's all that matters.

44 b_sharp  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:44:33am

re: #38 ggt

decided to stay out of that one.

The upshot of one subthread was that qualification for a CCW means you're sane and level headed.

45 darthstar  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:44:53am

re: #38 ggt

decided to stay out of that one.

The original article I linked (well, an open letter) is a good read. Lawmakers mocking lawmakers.

46 Charleston Chew  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:45:33am
...when asked whether President Obama could ignore a potential Court ruling the health care reform law as unconstitutional, he declined to say that Obama had that right - saying only that the president can ignore the Court’s rulings only in extraordinary situations.

"Extraordinary situation" is code for when a Republican is President.

It's probably best for the world that would-be Republican fascists like Gingrich live in the US, where they can fulfill their evil desires by just saying stupid things on tv and taking money from lobbyists. If they had been born in other parts of the world or in other times, their ruthless selfish ambition would lead to bloodshed.

47 Gretchen G.Tiger  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:45:41am

re: #44 b_sharp

The upshot of one subthread was that qualification for a CCW means you're sane and level headed.

I know a lot of people take the classes and decide NOT to apply for the CCW. Too much responsibility.

48 Gretchen G.Tiger  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:46:37am

re: #45 darthstar

The original article I linked (well, an open letter) is a good read. Lawmakers mocking lawmakers.

I shouldn't have said anything. I'm just not up for a 2nd Amendment discussion today.

49 Simply Sarah  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:46:50am

re: #43 Lidane

That's just it -- he doesn't care. If it wins him votes with the idiots and rubes and wins the GOP nomination for him, that's all that matters.

I know he doesn't care. That just makes it all the more dangerous and terrifying. And if I sound alarmist on this, it's because even starting down this path really could rip the country apart. We already saw what happened when states pushed the idea they could ignore Congress and I can't see this turning out much better.

50 Gretchen G.Tiger  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:47:03am

re: #45 darthstar

The original article I linked (well, an open letter) is a good read. Lawmakers mocking lawmakers.

Page it for future reference.

51 darthstar  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:47:10am

re: #48 ggt

I shouldn't have said anything. I'm just not up for a 2nd Amendment discussion today.

No worries.

52 Simply Sarah  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:47:54am

re: #46 Charleston Chew

"Extraordinary situation" is code for when a Republican is President.

It's probably best for the world that would-be Republican fascists like Gingrich live in the US, where they can fulfill their evil desires by just saying stupid things on tv and taking money from lobbyists. If they had been born in other parts of the world or in other times, their ruthless selfish ambition would lead to bloodshed.

Of course. It's just like how judges are only activist when the make rulings the right doesn't like.

53 SpaceJesus  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:48:04am

Obama was an actual professor of Constitutional law. I'd love to see the right's "intellectual" go toe to toe with somebody who actually has read the document and its body of case law.

54 lawhawk  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:48:23am

re: #34 ggt

Oh, he wants the power for himself, but once a president acts with a certain level of power, all future presidents use and expand upon it. It's that latter part that he really doesn't get.

Consider that using this kind of power, a future president could unilaterally impose all kinds of environmental legislation and rules that a court could previously have ruled as unconstitutional - because of the extraordinary circumstances.

Ditto for gay marriage. Or equal rights/protections. Or terrorism/homeland security. Or anything else that comes to mind.

There's literally an endless list of things that one can deem extraordinary circumstances and the president could simply ignore the Court, which is why this is such a dangerous line of reasoning. The Office of President is constrained by the other branches, and Newt's reasoning would throw off the shackles of judicial review - an unfettered power grab.

55 erik_t  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:48:52am

re: #53 SpaceJesus

Obama was an actual professor of Constitutional law. I'd love to see the right's "intellectual" go toe to toe with somebody who actually has read the document and its body of case law.

ELITIST IVORY-TOWER ACADEMICIAN!!!1

56 HappyWarrior  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:49:04am

re: #52 Simply Sarah

Of course. It's just like how judges are only activist when the make rulings the right doesn't like.

I used to say only in jest that is what an activist judge is but Newt's comments suggest that more and more.

57 Gretchen G.Tiger  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:49:45am
Amendment XIV
Section 1.

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Somehow Newt thinks this can be interpreted to allow for Personhood for fetuses.

58 Simply Sarah  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:49:53am

re: #53 SpaceJesus

Obama was an actual professor of Constitutional law. I'd love to see the right's "intellectual" go toe to toe with somebody who actually has read the document and its body of case law.

You're making the unwise assumption that the Republican base (Or even much of the rest of the country, sadly) actually cares about what the actual document says or means.

59 HappyWarrior  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:50:05am

re: #53 SpaceJesus

Obama was an actual professor of Constitutional law. I'd love to see the right's "intellectual" go toe to toe with somebody who actually has read the document and its body of case law.

"Professor Obama" Oh noes. But yeah I think Obama would make Gingrich look like the shallow intellectual he really is at a debate.

60 SpaceJesus  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:50:37am

re: #55 erik_t

Wouldn't even have to be one of those. Any random 2L could smack Gingrich around on the subject.

61 HappyWarrior  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:50:39am

Newt has no room to complain about activist judges when he's on recording as supporting in the past the death penalty for pot smokers.

62 Charleston Chew  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:51:37am

re: #20 dragonfire1981

There really should be stricter minimum qualifications for someone who wants to run for President.

At the very least, maybe there should be a rule that you can't campaign for President of the United States on a promise to violate the oath of office of the President of the United States.

Seriously, that should be like that sign at carnival rides that says, "You must be at least this tall..."

63 Simply Sarah  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:52:34am

re: #56 HappyWarrior

I used to say only in jest that is what an activist judge is but Newt's comments suggest that more and more.

Oh, I'm dead serious when I say it, because there's no question in my mind that it's the truth. Iowa and gay marriage is a good example, since the legal community widely considers the court's ruling to have been the only correct one based on the state's constitution. It just doesn't matter to these people.

64 darthstar  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:53:09am

re: #59 HappyWarrior

"Professor Obama" Oh noes. But yeah I think Obama would make Gingrich look like the shallow intellectual he really is at a debate.

But the media would be required to say that the debate was a draw, or that Newt made some valid points...if the Republicans don't have a viable candidate then their PACs will simply save all the money they raised for 2016...and the networks want that money.

65 blueraven  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:54:00am

Michelle Bachmann agrees with Newts position on the judicial branch. I wonder how many other republicans will follow suit?

66 Gepetto  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:54:09am

Subversion of the Three-Branch system of government seems to be the norm nowadays. Presidents are relying on Executive orders and signing statements to erode power from the Legislative branch, and now an aspirant to the office of President proposes the erosion of the Judicial branch by giving inquiry/subpoena power over the judiciary to the Legislative branch, and concurrently asserting the Executive branch has a right to ignore judge's rulings. It is clear that historians and Constitutional scholars of both political stripes are hellbent on shoring up and expanding the power of the Unitary Executive.

67 Gretchen G.Tiger  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:54:31am
Definition from Nolo’s Plain-English Law Dictionary

Contained in the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, this clause prohibits the government from establishing an official religion. It also prohibits the government from preferring one religion over another, preferring religion over nonreligion, or vice versa.

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

IMHO, the big issue this election.

68 HappyWarrior  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:55:39am

re: #63 Simply Sarah

Oh, I'm dead serious when I say it, because there's no question in my mind that it's the truth. Iowa and gay marriage is a good example, since the legal community widely considers the court's ruling to have been the only correct one based on the state's constitution. It just doesn't matter to these people.

True that. I believe it too. I am just saying. It used to feel like I was being kneejerk but it seems more and more that is what judicial activism really is since guys like Newt never call out right wing judicial activist rulings.

69 Obdicut  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:55:50am

re: #66 Gepetto

A wild magical balance fairy appears!

It used Both Sides!

It's not very effective!

70 jaunte  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:56:29am

re: #57 ggt

Somehow Newt thinks this can be interpreted to allow for Personhood for fetuses.

[Link: www.cafepress.com...]

71 Gretchen G.Tiger  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:56:44am

People think the Constitution has been stolen from under them by fast talking librul legal con men.

Newt will set it all right again.

/gah

72 Charleston Chew  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:56:59am

re: #58 Simply Sarah

You're making the unwise assumption that the Republican base (Or even much of the rest of the country, sadly) actually cares about what the actual document says or means.

The "Constitution" is a feeling that lives in the heart of every conservative, put there by Jesus, not on some old piece of paper full a words and shit.

73 Gretchen G.Tiger  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:58:43am

re: #72 Charleston Chew

The "Constitution" is a feeling that lives in the heart of every conservative, put there by Jesus, not on some old piece of paper full a words and shit.

The thing is, IMHO, that individual rights, government by the people IS the natural order of things. It is every human's birthright, not just those who happen to be in the borders of the US or who espouse a certain doctrine, or who have a certain skin color . . . .

74 Obdicut  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 9:59:57am

re: #73 ggt

It's definitely not the natural order of things, but it is everyone's birthright.

75 Kronocide  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 10:00:05am

They Both Do It!

MBF, all the fookin time

76 Simply Sarah  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 10:00:26am

Of course, this is just an evolution of the congressional Republican idea of adding text to laws that says "The courts can't review this law." This is just skipping that step.

77 Gepetto  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 10:01:54am

re: #69 Obdicut

hey Obdicut, while I love your juvenile invocation of MBF, I should think that someone so gifted in ego and intellect might be able to formulate a response that either supports or contradicts my statements.

78 Gretchen G.Tiger  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 10:02:14am

I'm outta here for a while.

have a great afternoon all!

79 Simply Sarah  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 10:02:35am

re: #76 Simply Sarah

Of course, this is just an evolution of the congressional Republican idea of adding text to laws that says "The courts can't review this law." This is just skipping that step.

For example: the Marriage Protection Act

And sponsored by libertarian hero Ron Paul, of course.

80 Kronocide  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 10:05:49am

re: #77 Gepetto

hey Obdicut, while I love your juvenile invocation of MBF, I should think that someone so gifted in ego and intellect might be able to formulate a response that either supports or contradicts my statements.

Actually it's the MBF response that is juvenile. And your response to being called on it is juvenile.

How about you support your statement of the current POTUS' actions comparative to what you are talking about?

You made the assertion, you make the substation.

81 darthstar  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 10:09:14am

re: #66 Gepetto

Bush wielded unitary executive powers, as evidenced by his 800 or so signing statements exempting himself from laws. President Obama actually worked to reverse some of the damage bush did in this regard.

[Link: www.nytimes.com...]

“In exercising my responsibility to determine whether a provision of an enrolled bill is unconstitutional, I will act with caution and restraint, based only on interpretations of the Constitution that are well-founded,” Mr. Obama wrote in a memorandum to the heads of all departments and agencies in the executive branch.

Mr. Obama’s directions were the latest step in his administration’s effort to deal with a series of legal and policy disputes it inherited from the Bush administration. They came the same day Mr. Obama lifted restrictions Mr. Bush placed on federal financing for research that uses embryonic stem cells.

82 Obdicut  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 10:09:52am

re: #77 Gepetto

Juvenile?

Your contention:

Subversion of the Three-Branch system of government seems to be the norm nowadays

Your support for that:

Presidents are relying on Executive orders and signing statements to erode power from the Legislative branch

True, Obama has made some small movements in this area, but not actually anything greater than what Bush did. So, not actually eroding anything that wasn't already eroded. So, sorta fail on your part, minorly good point.

and now an aspirant to the office of President proposes the erosion of the Judicial branch by giving inquiry/subpoena power over the judiciary to the Legislative branch, and concurrently asserting the Executive branch has a right to ignore judge's rulings.

Not comparable to the former at all. This isn't some small erosion through a signing statement, this is a flat-out declaration that the judicial branch serves at the behest of the legislative, and that the executive is not bound by the judicial in the least.

You're comparing apples with vast hectares of seething apple cider, filled with cider eels and botulism.

It is clear that historians and Constitutional scholars of both political stripes are hellbent on shoring up and expanding the power of the Unitary Executive.

Nope. Newt, and the GOP in general, attack the judicial branch from many angles. It's not so much a pumping up of the executive, as an attack on the judicial. Which is pretty obvious, given that one of the things you yourself cited was an expansion of legislative power, not executive.

Are there some on the left who assert a larger role for the presidency? Sure.

But Obama isn't even using the full power of the presidency in the ways he could be to overcome GOP obstructionism.

So, your magical balance fairy was indeed attempting magical balance-- comparing to vastly unequal things-- you somehow tried to argue an expansion of legislative power was an expansion of executive power (my favorite) and you ignored that the GOP's attitude is much more an attack on judges than it is an expansion of the other branches. They expand by default, but the GOP's aim really is to reduce the power of the judiciary, since it's much less vulnerable to their cheap demagoguery.

That's far more of an explanation than your anemic MBF attempt deserved.

83 lawhawk  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 10:09:55am

re: #77 Gepetto

Presidents have authority to issue presidential proclamations and executive orders or signing statements; and there are issues over whether a president can ignore statutory law.

However, what Newt is suggesting here is a vast expansion of presidential power and to a lesser extent legislative power at the expense of an independent judiciary. It's that latter part that is most troublesome.

Proclamations and executive orders don't curtail the power of the courts; Newt calling on a presidential power to simply ignore judicial decisions it doesn't like, and to impeach and/or subpoena justices based on legal decisions rendered isn't just about judicial review - it's about the independence of the judiciary.

84 Charleston Chew  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 10:10:17am

re: #73 ggt

The thing is, IMHO, that individual rights, government by the people IS the natural order of things. It is every human's birthright, not just those who happen to be in the borders of the US or who espouse a certain doctrine, or who have a certain skin color . . .

Going to be a philosophical nit-picker, here:

Rights aren't natural, they're wholly artificial. A zebra having it's leg eaten by a lion while it's still alive is natural. And the zebra's probably thinking, "Hey, that's a violation of my rights." Rights are what separates us from the animals. Rights and Tupperware.

85 OhCrapIHaveACrushOnSarahPalin  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 10:10:21am

Feh, more nullification/states rights confederate conservatism.

When ppl show you who they are, believe them.

86 Simply Sarah  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 10:13:06am

re: #85 OhCrapIHaveACrushOnSarahPalin

Feh, more nullification/states rights confederate conservatism.

When ppl show you who they are, believe them.

It's analogous to all that, yes.

87 Obdicut  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 10:13:16am

re: #85 OhCrapIHaveACrushOnSarahPalin

This isn't states-rights conservatism. This is actually an attack on states rights that shows that even that isn't an honest ideological position on the part of the GOP. This is a massive claim of greater power for the congress and Presidency. If this were the case, the federal government would gain enormous power compared to the states, since the judiciary has so much of its power and function at the state level.

This is party authoritarianism.

88 sagehen  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 10:14:40am

re: #32 Lawrence Schmerel

If a president refuses to follow a Supreme Court decision, I think we have to rely on Congress to act.

In 1956, the Supreme Court declared segregated busing unconstitutional. Montgomery was integrated by court order as a result, but Eisenhower ignored the ruling and allowed segregation to continue in other places. This continued until Congress passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

I take a much more generous view of Eisenhower. He didn't much like the decision in Brown v Board, but he also believed that the Supreme Court outranked him -- so when they handed down a unanimous decree, by god he was going to enforce it. (also, no way in hell was he going to let some pissant southern governor use the national guard to thwart the 14th Amendment) -- with all of the United States Military to pick from he chose the 101st Airborne; those 9 black kids would be protected by the unit that led the way on D-Day.

89 Simply Sarah  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 10:15:05am

re: #87 Obdicut

This isn't states-rights conservatism. This is actually an attack on states rights that shows that even that isn't an honest ideological position on the part of the GOP. This is a massive claim of greater power for the congress and Presidency. If this were the case, the federal government would gain enormous power compared to the states, since the judiciary has so much of its power and function at the state level.

This is party authoritarianism.

It all boils down to the same thing, really. This is just more bold and open about it than the "states rights" facade. Both are just methods of enforcing an authoritarian and backwards stance, laws and constitution be damned.

90 Kronocide  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 10:15:29am

re: #87 Obdicut

This is party authoritarianism.

Exactly.

But so is Obama!

91 Obdicut  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 10:16:16am

re: #89 Simply Sarah

It all boils down to the same thing, really. This is just more bold and open about it than the "states rights" facade. Both are just methods of enforcing an authoritarian and backwards stance, laws and constitution be damned.

Yep. States rights was never about states rights, for the modern GOP. They only support the states when they're acting more conservatively than the federal government.

It's not an honest position.

92 Gepetto  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 10:16:25am

re: #80 BigPapa

Actually it's the MBF response that is juvenile. And your response to being called on it is juvenile.

How about you support your statement of the current POTUS' actions comparative to what you are talking about?

You made the assertion, you make the substation.

I wasn't speaking of POTUS in singular. It has become an expanding habit over the last several administrations to end-around the legislative branch.
[Link: www.nytimes.com...]
With Newts ridiculous statements on how he sees the power of the Presidency and the Legislative branch over the Judicial branch, this current expansive behavior is set to take an explosive new turn in the unlikely event he is elected.

I'm not sure if I made the substation or not. I don't know what that means, perhaps a video game reference?

93 prairiefire  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 10:16:42am

re: #17 Killgore Trout

They were given everything they wanted in the "compromise". I didn't expect them to invent new demands.

Boehner could be responding to heat from the base.

94 jaunte  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 10:17:48am

re: #92 Gepetto

He meant substantiation, as you know.

95 Gepetto  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 10:18:45am

re: #83 lawhawk
We agree.

96 blueraven  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 10:19:31am

re: #93 prairiefire

Boehner could be responding to heat from the base.

The truth is, Boehner can't get his rogue house under any kind of control. They see this as a win for Obama, so it must be opposed. It is as simple as that.
It was passed in the Senate by 89 votes.

The thinking is that forcing Obama on the Keystone Pipeline in 2 months will effectively kill it, as he can say there was not enough time to finish all the studies. And then what will the republicans do? Vote against the payroll tax cuts? They have boxed themselves into a corner.

97 Kronocide  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 10:21:01am

re: #92 Gepetto

I'm not sure if I made the substation or not. I don't know what that means, perhaps a video game reference?

Being a dick about typing errors? Winning.

If you couldn't figure out I meant 'substantiation' then you surely shouldn't be discussing something such as Presidential powers balanced against the Legislative branch.

So by substantiation, it would be nice if you could back up your assertion that 'they all do it.' Especially, is Obama doing it too?

98 reine.de.tout  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 10:21:09am

re: #83 lawhawk

Presidents have authority to issue presidential proclamations and executive orders or signing statements; and there are issues over whether a president can ignore statutory law.

However, what Newt is suggesting here is a vast expansion of presidential power and to a lesser extent legislative power at the expense of an independent judiciary. It's that latter part that is most troublesome.

Proclamations and executive orders don't curtail the power of the courts; Newt calling on a presidential power to simply ignore judicial decisions it doesn't like, and to impeach and/or subpoena justices based on legal decisions rendered isn't just about judicial review - it's about the independence of the judiciary.

Thank you; brief, excellent and easily understandable description of Newt's idiocy.

99 erik_t  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 10:21:10am

re: #96 blueraven

I can't tell if he's an intrinsically incompetent Speaker or if he'd be vaguely decent when trying to lead a group of people who had the best interests of their constituents at heart.

100 Obdicut  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 10:21:28am

re: #92 Gepetto

Again: You start out by talking about expansion of Executive power. Then you acknowledge that we're actually talking about the executive and legislative gaining power at the expense of the judiciary. Then you somehow forget it again.

The GOP is engaged in an assault against the power of the judiciary.

101 The Ghost of a Flea  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 10:24:28am

re: #77 Gepetto

hey Obdicut, while I love your juvenile invocation of MBF, I should think that someone so gifted in ego and intellect might be able to formulate a response that either supports or contradicts my statements.

A simple representation of the difference in scale is that issues relating to the scope of executive orders depend on interpretation of Article 2, Section 1, Clause 1 and the powers that emanate from it. Structural measures to address these issues exists, both in the form of court precedents and in the validity of "legislative veto."

Nullifying the judicial branch equals by executive fiat is ripping out Article 3 wholesale.

The former is...problematic, but I'd argue that there's a lot of contextual factors that enter into when an executive order overreaches. The latter proposition is the excision of a basic aspect of checks and balances.

102 Kronocide  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 10:25:29am

And Gepetto, the NYTimes article you linked was about Obama using his executive power to promote his agenda. That is using power that he has.

Which is much different than what Newt is proposing: he has no power he assumes he has. That's incredibly reckless.

On a smaller scale, it's incredibly reckless for us, the constituency, to cynically assume that 'they all do it.'

103 SanFranciscoZionist  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 10:27:38am

re: #19 BigPapa

Too early for the oft ill used terms such as 'fascist' or 'dictator?'

This is really freaky stuff, Crazy Uncle grade nuttery.

'Dictator' implies that the person is in power. "Running for tyrant?"

104 OhCrapIHaveACrushOnSarahPalin  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 10:28:23am

re: #87 Obdicut

This isn't states-rights conservatism. This is actually an attack on states rights that shows that even that isn't an honest ideological position on the part of the GOP. This is a massive claim of greater power for the congress and Presidency. If this were the case, the federal government would gain enormous power compared to the states, since the judiciary has so much of its power and function at the state level.

This is party authoritarianism.

Well, it's more chest beating and strawgrasping to appeal to those sortsdirectories who think they are privy to special rights, with curtailed rights for everyone else. States rights didn't have to become that, but GOP conservatism in its current incarnation has indeed culminated in that.

I do wonder who else besides the Bush AGs will give Newt the smackdown on it. My hopes are not high.

105 Kronocide  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 10:29:00am

re: #103 SanFranciscoZionist

'Dictator' implies that the person is in power. "Running for tyrant?"

Ah, duly noted.

106 Obdicut  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 10:29:25am

re: #104 OhCrapIHaveACrushOnSarahPalin

Well, it's more chest beating and strawgrasping to appeal to those sortsdirectories who think they are privy to special rights, with curtailed rights for everyone else.

Yep. Which is why the supposed states-rights lovers try to define marriage at the federal level to exclude gay people.

107 Killgore Trout  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 10:29:52am

Occupy Protesters Vow To Shut Down Obama Office

One of the activists, Julie Brown, who voted for Obama in 2008 said she no longer believed in him.

"We need a real leader who will put this country back to work," she said.

An Obama campaign spokesman declined to comment on the matter.

108 OhCrapIHaveACrushOnSarahPalin  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 10:32:01am

Dumbphone/autocorrect fail, should be just "sorts".

re: #104 OhCrapIHaveACrushOnSarahPalin

sortsdirectories

109 Killgore Trout  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 10:33:23am

Looks like yesterday's claims from the Iranians about capturing an American were true.
Captured 'CIA spy' is US citizen of Iranian origin: TV

110 sagehen  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 10:36:11am

re: #109 Killgore Trout

Looks like yesterday's claims from the Iranians about capturing an American were true.
Captured 'CIA spy' is US citizen of Iranian origin: TV

Oops??

111 OhCrapIHaveACrushOnSarahPalin  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 10:38:17am

re: #106 Obdicut

Yep. Which is why the supposed states-rights lovers try to define marriage at the federal level to exclude gay people.

ANYTHING to get the gubbment to grant them more perks and bennies than all others.

These are also the same assholes who apparently need the gumbmint to tell them if their children are having abortions or not, so..

112 Killgore Trout  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 10:38:52am

re: #110 sagehen

Oops??

Maybe, it's hard to tell without more information. He could have been captured by the Taliban in Afghanistan of even Pakistan and transferred to Iran. Same could be true for the drone.

113 Charleston Chew  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 10:44:32am

re: #107 Killgore Trout

Occupy Protesters Vow To Shut Down Obama Office

Apparently, no one ever advised them to "set achievable goals":

The group wants Obama to cut military spending by half...

114 Killgore Trout  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 10:46:01am

OWS hero hit women...
Army officer recounts violent Manning incident

Fulton said she was on the phone in the common work area and after hearing a disturbance she turned around to see Showman pinning Manning to the ground.
"She said that he had struck her and she had a big red welt on her face," Fulton said.

115 Killgore Trout  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 10:47:29am

re: #113 Charleston Chew

Apparently, no one ever advised them to "set achievable goals":

It's just such an absurd movement. Universal support from the rank and file progressives makes me worry that OWS may cost Obama a second term.

116 HappyWarrior  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 10:47:30am

re: #113 Charleston Chew

Apparently, no one ever advised them to "set achievable goals":

Yeah, that's insane.

117 erik_t  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 10:51:13am

re: #115 Killgore Trout

I'm concerned.

118 SanFranciscoZionist  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 10:51:53am

re: #46 Charleston Chew

"Extraordinary situation" is code for when a Republican is President.

They do often seem somewhat vague about the rule of law, and how, like gravity, it works ALL the time.

119 SanFranciscoZionist  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 10:54:00am

re: #84 Charleston Chew

Going to be a philosophical nit-picker, here:

Rights aren't natural, they're wholly artificial. A zebra having it's leg eaten by a lion while it's still alive is natural. And the zebra's probably thinking, "Hey, that's a violation of my rights." Rights are what separates us from the animals. Rights and Tupperware.

There are two things that separate man from the animals. One, we use cutlery. And two, we're capable of controlling our sexual urges. Now you might be an exception, mister, but don't drag me down into your private hell."

120 Killgore Trout  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 10:54:43am

re: #117 erik_t

I'm concerned.

Especially considering the alternatives it's a very troubling possibility. I'm not suggesting that everyone one the left join in lockstep partisan unity but I really think there should be more practical thought and consideration for the political repercussions of embracing radicalism.

121 blueraven  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 10:54:57am

re: #107 Killgore Trout

Occupy Protesters Vow To Shut Down Obama Office

These "handful" of protesters (as described in the link you posted last night on this story) can call themselves part of the occupy movement all they want. The fact is they are the radical Catholic workers group led by Iowa co-founder Frank Cordaro.

[Link: en.wikipedia.org...]

They are a splinter group at best with little support.

122 SanFranciscoZionist  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 10:55:05am

re: #107 Killgore Trout

Occupy Protesters Vow To Shut Down Obama Office

The firebaggers are taking to the streets?

123 Killgore Trout  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 10:58:36am

re: #122 SanFranciscoZionist

The firebaggers are taking to the streets?

It seems so. I have to think that maybe the activist base is going to start waking up as we get closer to the election. Let's hope so, If they don't then we're all in a lot of trouble.

124 SanFranciscoZionist  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 10:59:33am

re: #123 Killgore Trout

It seems so. I have to think that maybe the activist base is going to start waking up as we get closer to the election. Let's hope so, If they don't then we're all in a lot of trouble.

Eh. Maybe.

125 blueraven  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 10:59:40am

re: #123 Killgore Trout

It seems so. I have to think that maybe the activist base is going to start waking up as we get closer to the election. Let's hope so, If they don't then we're all in a lot of trouble.

How many protesters were at the Obama office KT?

126 Killgore Trout  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 11:00:07am

No sign of concern from Dkos today. They're all shilling for Bradley Manning and worried about an American Police State.

127 Kronocide  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 11:00:13am

I just found out Maceo Parker is playing an hour from my house in 3 weeks.

Get my fix of 2% Jazz 98% Funky.

128 blueraven  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 11:02:40am

re: #124 SanFranciscoZionist

Eh. Maybe.

I dont think so. This is a radical pseudo religious group.

129 SanFranciscoZionist  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 11:03:47am

re: #128 blueraven

I dont think so. This is a radical pseudo religious group.

Well, definitely not from them, no.

130 William Barnett-Lewis  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 11:05:20am

re: #125 blueraven

How many protesters were at the Obama office KT?

It was horrible. There was a dozen trust fund marxists misbehaving!

131 Kronocide  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 11:06:18am

HOW TO TICK PEOPLE OFF

Leave the copy machine set to reduce 200%, extra dark, 17 inch paper, 99 copies.

In the memo field of all your checks, write "for sexual favors."

Specify that your drive-through order is "TO-GO."

If you have a glass eye, tap on it occasionally with your pen while talking to others.

Stomp on little plastic ketchup packets.

Insist on keeping your car windshield wipers running in all weather conditions "to keep them tuned up."

132 blueraven  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 11:06:19am

re: #129 SanFranciscoZionist

Well, definitely not from them, no.

But KT has posted this story several times now. It is an extremely small radical group of Christian anarchist. Hardly reflective of the far left.

133 sattv4u2  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 11:09:35am

Cinnamon Life cereal with sliced banana for lunch

Cause thats how I roll !!!

134 Obdicut  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 11:18:55am

re: #126 Killgore Trout

No sign of concern from Dkos today. They're all shilling for Bradley Manning and worried about an American Police State.

Huh? None of the actual front-page stuff is about Manning. There's two articles on the side, with a small number of comments.

By 'all' do you mean 'a very small number'?

135 OhCrapIHaveACrushOnSarahPalin  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 11:20:20am

re: #126 Killgore Trout

No sign of concern from Dkos the lefty sites today. They're all shilling for Bradley Manning and worried about an American Police State.

fxd

136 darthstar  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 11:20:39am

re: #134 Obdicut

Huh? None of the actual front-page stuff is about Manning. There's two articles on the side, with a small number of comments.

By 'all' do you mean 'a very small number'?

You can't spell all without smALL...besides, they're probably OWS sympathizers.

137 OhCrapIHaveACrushOnSarahPalin  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 11:21:37am

re: #115 Killgore Trout

It's just such an absurd movement. Universal support from the rank and file progressives makes me worry that OWS may cost Obama a second term.

9_9

138 erik_t  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 11:21:58am

re: #134 Obdicut

Huh? None of the actual front-page stuff is about Manning. There's two articles on the side, with a small number of comments.

By 'all' do you mean 'a very small number'?

Facts have a well-known factual bias.

139 b_sharp  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 11:22:01am

re: #119 SanFranciscoZionist

There are two things that separate man from the animals. One, we use cutlery. And two, we're capable of controlling our sexual urges. Now you might be an exception, mister, but don't drag me down into your private hell."

Most mammals experience sex infrequently during their lifetimes, unless you're a hopeless nerd, humans can experience sex all the time. We can control our urges because when compared to other mammals, each 'urge' is diluted.

Even though our cutlery is designed for a purpose, there are other animals who use found cutlery (we'd call it a twig or stick).

Just sayin'.

140 SanFranciscoZionist  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 11:23:59am

re: #139 b_sharp

Most mammals experience sex infrequently during their lifetimes, unless you're a hopeless nerd, humans can experience sex all the time. We can control our urges because when compared to other mammals, each 'urge' is diluted.

Even though our cutlery is designed for a purpose, there are other animals who use found cutlery (we'd call it a twig or stick).

Just sayin'.

Yeah, yeah, tell it to Joe Friday.

141 jaunte  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 11:24:10am

re: #139 b_sharp

[Link: www.imdb.com...]

142 Obdicut  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 11:24:34am

There's actually quite a few good things on DKos today. I've never really been into them, but some of this stuff is quite good.

[Link: www.dailykos.com...]

There are issues that are difficult to understand. The mass-endowing properties of a Higgs field, the intricacies of protein folding, the appeal of the Kardashians. There are issues of opinion; issues of faith; issues simply lacking enough facts to reach a confident conclusion.

The reason the United States faces a huge budget deficit is not one of those issues. In fact, it's so simple it could be the plot of a children's book. Only this book doesn't have a happy ending.

If you listen to the news, you might think went on a spending spree. You might think we shoved fresh billions into social programs, or gave fat pay raises to government workers, or that there's been some huge expansion of the government bureaucracy. That's not quite what happened.

143 Killgore Trout  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 11:24:49am

re: #134 Obdicut

Huh? None of the actual front-page stuff is about Manning. There's two articles on the side, with a small number of comments.

By 'all' do you mean 'a very small number'?

have you talked to Gus since he's been back?

144 darthstar  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 11:26:01am

re: #115 Killgore Trout

It's just such an absurd movement. Universal support from the rank and file progressives makes me worry that OWS may cost Obama a second term.

Your concern is noted. By the way, it's not just progressives that like the idea of health care for all and asking the wealthy to pay their fair share of taxes. After all, the wealthy enjoy government subsidized oil in their cars, driving on safe roads and bridges, and having the police and fire departments to help them in times of need just like the rest of us.

145 blueraven  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 11:26:27am

re: #115 Killgore Trout

It's just such an absurd movement. Universal support from the rank and file progressives makes me worry that OWS may cost Obama a second term.

You are either being dishonest or just plain out ignorant with this universal support bullshit.

146 darthstar  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 11:28:24am

re: #142 Obdicut

There's actually quite a few good things on DKos today. I've never really been into them, but some of this stuff is quite good.

[Link: www.dailykos.com...]

Mark Sumner is one of my favorite writers there. And Hunter too, who has a good piece on the failure of Austerity.

147 Obdicut  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 11:28:34am

re: #143 Killgore Trout

have you talked to Gus since he's been back?

Hey, nice complete dodge!

Did you just stop caring whether or not what you posted had the slightest shred of truth to it?

You claimed DKos were all defending Manning and blathering about a police state. I went and had a look, and nothing you said was true.

What is the point of saying something untrue that's so easily shown to be untrue?

148 sattv4u2  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 11:30:16am

re: #140 SanFranciscoZionist

Yeah, yeah, tell it to Joe Friday.

"Just the facts, Ma'am"

149 b_sharp  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 11:30:28am

re: #141 jaunte

[Link: www.imdb.com...]

OK, OK, I take it back.

.'niyas Tsuj

.)kcits ro giwt a ti llac d'ew( yreltuc dnuof esu ohw slamina rehto era ereht ,esoprup a rof dengised si yreltuc ruo hguoht Neve

.detulid si 'egru' hcae ,slammam rehto ot derapmoc nehw esuaceb segru ruo lortnoc nac Ew .emit eht lla xes ecneirepxe nac snamuh ,dren sselepoh a er'uoy sselnu ,semitefil rieht gnirud yltneuqerfni xes ecneirepxe slammam Tsom

There, is that better?
Sheesh.

150 sattv4u2  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 11:31:32am

re: #139 b_sharp

Most mammals experience sex infrequently during their lifetimes, unless you're a hopeless nerd, humans can experience sex all the time. We can control our urges because when compared to other mammals, each 'urge' is diluted.

Even though our cutlery is designed for a purpose, there are other animals who use found cutlery (we'd call it a twig or stick).

Just sayin'.

Why'dyoulookmywaywhenyousaidthat???

151 jaunte  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 11:31:39am

re: #149 b_sharp

I'm going to have my pet crow type that out right-way round.

152 darthstar  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 11:33:24am

Serious question here...should I get my wife a nook or a kindle?

153 sattv4u2  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 11:33:24am

re: #151 jaunte

I'm going to have my pet crow type that out right-way round.

Is it's name Sheryl?

154 sattv4u2  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 11:34:05am

re: #152 darthstar

Serious question here...should I get my wife a nook or a kindle?

Do what I do

get both,,,, return the one she least prefers!

155 Killgore Trout  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 11:34:20am

re: #147 Obdicut

Hey, nice complete dodge!

Did you just stop caring whether or not what you posted had the slightest shred of truth to it?

I asked that because he has some interesting things to say about OWS now. He'll tell you himself.

156 b_sharp  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 11:35:08am

re: #150 sattv4u2

Why'dyoulookmywaywhenyousaidthat???

I needed an example.

157 recusancy  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 11:35:24am

re: #115 Killgore Trout

It's just such an absurd movement. Universal support from the rank and file progressives makes me worry that OWS may cost Obama a second term.

Why do you care if Obama gets a second term or not? I thought you weren't voting.

158 b_sharp  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 11:35:43am

re: #152 darthstar

Serious question here...should I get my wife a nook or a kindle?

How about a special kind of nookie.

159 Obdicut  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 11:36:40am

re: #155 Killgore Trout

I asked that because he has some interesting things to say about OWS now. He'll tell you himself.

Hey, nice dodge again! Man, you're good at that.

Yeah, I know that OWS-- the shreds of it that are left-- voted to support Manning. I'm not sure why you expect me to care deeply about it.

Now can you explain why you claimed DKOS were all blathering about a police state and talking about Manning, when that isn't in the least bit true?

At this point, with the huge number of outright falsehoods you've stated-- and your complete refusal to take responsibility for any of them-- you're kind of becoming just an LGF in-joke. You're becoming pineapple on pizza.

160 erik_t  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 11:38:15am

re: #159 Obdicut

Hey, I like pineapple on pizza.

161 Gepetto  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 11:38:46am

re: #97 BigPapa

Being a dick about typing errors? Winning.

If you couldn't figure out I meant 'substantiation' then you surely shouldn't be discussing something such as Presidential powers balanced against the Legislative branch.

So by substantiation, it would be nice if you could back up your assertion that 'they all do it.' Especially, is Obama doing it too?

your calling MBF is rather dickish. so, i guess we're both being dicks, that enough MBF for you?
Yes, I cited one article from the NYT. here's another from the Boston Globe:
[Link: www.bostonglobe.com...]

My point was about the accelerating tendency for the Executive Branch to crib power from the other two branches. I thought it was terrible under Bush, continuation of bad precedent under Obama, and will be brought to an entirely new and abusive level by a monstrous President Newt. I can't imagine how terrible it would be for judges to be hauled in front of congressional panels to explain their decisions, no matter who is in the White House.

162 b_sharp  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 11:39:14am

re: #159 Obdicut

you're kind of becoming just an LGF in-joke. You're becoming pineapple on pizza.

Was that really necessary?

163 Digital Display  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 11:39:30am

re: #160 erik_t

Hey, I like pineapple on pizza.

Veggie pizza with extra Pineapple..Yummy..

164 Obdicut  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 11:40:00am

re: #161 Gepetto

Congressional panels are not part of the executive branch.

What don't you get about that?

165 Gepetto  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 11:42:49am

re: #100 Obdicut

Again: You start out by talking about expansion of Executive power. Then you acknowledge that we're actually talking about the executive and legislative gaining power at the expense of the judiciary. Then you somehow forget it again.

The GOP is engaged in an assault against the power of the judiciary.

Nope, I was making the broader point that the trend is toward expansion of Executive power at the expense of the other two branches, with the latest assault-and a hideous one at that-proposed by the terrible Newt Gingrich, the man who would be King.

166 recusancy  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 11:43:10am

re: #162 b_sharp

Was that really necessary?

Yes.

167 Obdicut  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 11:43:52am

re: #165 Gepetto

So why are you pretending that congressional panels are part of an expansion of the executive branch?

168 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 11:43:54am

Did someone say "pineapple pizza"?

I concur.

PS: We're winning!

169 William Barnett-Lewis  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 11:44:06am

re: #162 b_sharp

Was that really necessary?

Yes.

170 b_sharp  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 11:45:02am

re: #166 recusancy

Yes.

Not really. Comparing somebody to pineapple on pizza is radically radical.

171 sattv4u2  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 11:45:48am

re: #170 b_sharp

Not really. Comparing somebody to pineapple on pizza is radically radical.

Rad~!

172 recusancy  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 11:46:18am

re: #170 b_sharp

Not really. Comparing somebody to pineapple on pizza is radically radical.

Well, this is a radical left blog.

173 Kronocide  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 11:46:54am

I think it's outrageous to compare KT's Great Concern for OWS with pineapple on pizza.

It's more like BBQ'd chicken on pizza.

174 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 11:47:25am

re: #170 b_sharp

Not really. Comparing somebody to pineapple on pizza is radically radical.

Why, it's a compliment.

No?

/

175 Obdicut  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 11:47:30am

re: #173 BigPapa

That reminds me of how much I hate California Pizza Kitchen.

What they serve isn't really even pizza.

176 b_sharp  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 11:47:35am

re: #173 BigPapa

I think it's outrageous to compare KT's Great Concern for OWS with pineapple on pizza.

It's more like BBQ'd chicken on pizza.

See?

177 darthstar  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 11:48:48am

re: #154 sattv4u2

Do what I do

get both,,, return the one she least prefers!

I got her the Kindle Fire - even though they feel the need to put all those fucking extras (Netflix, Angry Birs, etc.) on it. I think she'll like having the browser, and it's hooked up to my Amazon account, so she never needs to buy a book...just pick and read.

178 sattv4u2  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 11:49:19am

re: #175 Obdicut

That reminds me of how much I hate California Pizza Kitchen.

What they serve isn't really even pizza.

And I have NO idea what to call their frozen varieties!!!

179 b_sharp  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 11:50:38am

re: #178 sattv4u2

And I have NO idea what to call their frozen varieties!!!

Pizzicles.

180 recusancy  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 11:51:35am

re: #177 darthstar

I got her the Kindle Fire - even though they feel the need to put all those fucking extras (Netflix, Angry Birs, etc.) on it. I think she'll like having the browser, and it's hooked up to my Amazon account, so she never needs to buy a book...just pick and read.

It's been getting bad reviews. I'd stick with the regular kindle.

181 sattv4u2  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 11:52:36am

re: #179 b_sharp

Pizzicles.

Instructions
Pre-heat oven to 375

Remove the pizza from the box and plastic wrapper

Discard the pizza and plastic wrapper

Turn off the oven

Eat the box

ENJOY!

182 darthstar  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 11:52:47am

re: #158 b_sharp

How about a special kind of nookie.

I like the way you think...

183 Kronocide  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 11:53:00am

re: #175 Obdicut

That reminds me of how much I hate California Pizza Kitchen.

What they serve isn't really even pizza.

I got hooked up doing alarm systems in their North CA locations when they exploded. The Thai Chicken is still good.

But beyond that... I'm over it.

184 Gepetto  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 11:53:48am

re: #164 Obdicut

Congressional panels are not part of the executive branch.

What don't you get about that?

I get it. What is wrong with you?

185 darthstar  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 11:54:13am

re: #180 recusancy

It's been getting bad reviews. I'd stick with the regular kindle.

If it sucks she can return it...or should I just get her an android Samsung Galaxy tablet?

186 Feline Emperor of the Conservative Waste  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 11:54:47am

re: #173 BigPapa

I think it's outrageous to compare KT's Great Concern for OWS with pineapple on pizza.

It's more like BBQ'd chicken on pizza.

I'd say anchovies. It smells, but some people just eat it up.

187 Obdicut  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 11:55:05am

re: #184 Gepetto

I get it. What is wrong with you?

Then why do you continually talk about the congressional panels as part of an expansion of executive power?

Why are you ignoring that the GOP, in general, is attempting to attack the judiciary?

And that Obama hasn't expanded the power of the executive beyond what Bush did, and in some places has scaled it back?

188 b_sharp  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 11:57:22am

re: #185 darthstar

If it sucks she can return it...or should I just get her an android Samsung Galaxy tablet?

Choice #2 looks good.

I have both a Kindle and an iPad I. I use the iPad to read my Kindle books.

189 Kronocide  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 11:58:09am

Cops Release Broken iPhone 911 Calls
Illinois man called five times over faulty Apple product

190 sattv4u2  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 12:00:10pm

re: #189 BigPapa

Cops Release Broken iPhone 911 Calls
Illinois man called five times over faulty Apple product

People that abuse the 911 system rate the same place in hell to me that people that misuse a handicap parking spot

191 blueraven  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 12:01:19pm

re: #147 Obdicut

Hey, nice complete dodge!

Did you just stop caring whether or not what you posted had the slightest shred of truth to it?

You claimed DKos were all defending Manning and blathering about a police state. I went and had a look, and nothing you said was true.

What is the point of saying something untrue that's so easily shown to be untrue?

And here is the Universal Support of progressives at the shut down Obama office rally.

Image: t1larg.dec17.occupy.jpg

35 people! Made up of Veterans for Peace and Catholic Workers Group. They look more like Paulbots than OWS.

[Link: politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...]

192 Gepetto  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 12:02:44pm

re: #167 Obdicut

So why are you pretending that congressional panels are part of an expansion of the executive branch?

Newt is attempting to pull judges in front of Legislative Branch panels. Newt has also now said that he, as president, would not feel particularly limited by Judicial opinion. Newt is running to be President, and proposing he can make a power grab on behalf of both the Legislative and the Executive branch from the Judiciary. In his scheme, as President, he is imagining his Executive power will extend to requiring the Judiciary to appear in front of the Legislative branch. Its truly mind-boggling.

193 Obdicut  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 12:02:52pm

re: #191 blueraven

They appear to have at least one druid. Watch out for entangling vines.

194 SanFranciscoZionist  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 12:02:52pm

re: #190 sattv4u2

People that abuse the 911 system rate the same place in hell to me that people that misuse a handicap parking spot

I say worse. A genuinely disabled person who can't get the space may be hugely inconvenienced, or unable to get groceries or their dry-cleaning, but they're probably not going to actually die from the experience. With budgets as tight as they are today, tying up the lines with a frivolous 911 call could have really ugly consequences in some places.

195 recusancy  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 12:03:15pm

re: #185 darthstar

If it sucks she can return it...or should I just get her an android Samsung Galaxy tablet?

If she's going to use it for anything other than reading I'd definitely go with a tablet over the Fire. Otherwise just get an e-ink kindle.

196 darthstar  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 12:03:26pm

re: #190 sattv4u2

People that abuse the 911 system rate the same place in hell to me that people that misuse a handicap parking spot

Whenever I see someone park in the handicapped spots I shout "That's for the PHYSICALLY handicapped"

Fuck 'em if they're embarrassed.

197 sattv4u2  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 12:04:24pm

re: #194 SanFranciscoZionist

better stated

Thanks

198 Kronocide  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 12:05:34pm
Lawyer: "What was the first thing your husband said to you when he woke that morning?"
Witness: "He said, 'Where am I, Cathy?'"
Lawyer: "And why did that upset you?"
Witness: "My name is Susan."


Things people said in court

199 Obdicut  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 12:06:13pm

re: #192 Gepetto

In his scheme, as President, he is imagining his Executive power will extend to requiring the Judiciary to appear in front of the Legislative branch. Its truly mind-boggling.

It's kind of mind-boggling how you think that congressional subpoenas represent a power of the executive branch.

The GOP is attacking the judiciary on many levels, whether it's running campaigns to oust judges who rule in favor of gay marriage, asserting that congress can pass laws that ignore the Supreme Court, argue that Congress can subpoena judges and have them arrested, or claiming that the president can ignore the Supreme Court.

This is not explainable as part of a long-standing expansion of executive power, as you claimed.

This is about the judiciary often upholding civil rights in a way that pisses off the GOP.

200 sattv4u2  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 12:06:31pm

re: #196 darthstar

Saw a car pull into a handicap spot at the mall

4 teens get out of a car,,all looked fine, no plates or placards on the car
I said "you know thats a handicapped spot, right?"
Answer

"We're only going to be a few minutes"

I let the air out of their back left and front right tire ,,waited for them to come out ,, looked at them and said 'NOW you're handicapped"

Walked away!

201 darthstar  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 12:08:16pm

re: #192 Gepetto

Newt is selling books. He wants the bigger prize that the presidency can't provide--money. By playing in the primaries - and getting a moment at the lead - he will secure himself a lucrative contract (we're talking millions for a few months' work) as a news analyst for Fox or CNN...whoever pays more.

It's all a matter of timing...that's why he doesn't care if he's called on his bullshit. You've heard the term "Manchurian Candidate"? He's a Kardashian Candidate.

202 b_sharp  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 12:08:17pm

re: #194 SanFranciscoZionist

I say worse. A genuinely disabled person who can't get the space may be hugely inconvenienced, or unable to get groceries or their dry-cleaning, but they're probably not going to actually die from the experience. With budgets as tight as they are today, tying up the lines with a frivolous 911 call could have really ugly consequences in some places.

Last week our main telephone company screwed up while preparing the system for an additional area code so any time the '473' prefix was used, it was forwarded to 911.

It lasted for a couple of hours but luckily nobody died because of it.

203 b_sharp  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 12:09:55pm

re: #200 sattv4u2

Saw a car pull into a handicap spot at the mall

4 teens get out of a car,,all looked fine, no plates or placards on the car
I said "you know thats a handicapped spot, right?"
Answer

"We're only going to be a few minutes"

I let the air out of their back left and front right tire ,,waited for them to come out ,, looked at them and said 'NOW you're handicapped"

Walked away!

I've thought about doing that many times.

204 Gepetto  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 12:10:34pm

re: #201 darthstar

I hope that is all he's doing. My fear is the credibility and attention he might get as the nominee.

205 Obdicut  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 12:11:35pm

re: #201 darthstar

I think he's got enough of a messiah complex that he actually wants to be president, he's just not very good at campaigning and doesn't really understand it.

Luckily, the GOP base likes that air of confused, hostile arrogance.

206 sattv4u2  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 12:12:18pm

re: #203 b_sharp

I've thought about doing that many times.

I figure, even IF they have a spare tire,, they more than likely only have one

And where will they get an air compressor from before a Mall Cop came across them parked there,,, two flats ,,,,

I should have stayed to watch

207 darthstar  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 12:13:13pm

re: #204 Gepetto

I hope that is all he's doing. My fear is the credibility and attention he might get as the nominee.

Newt won't be the candidate. The media companies are selling him as a credible candidate because it keeps the ratings up.

208 Sheila Broflovski  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 12:14:53pm

re: #196 darthstar

Whenever I see someone park in the handicapped spots I shout "That's for the PHYSICALLY handicapped"

Fuck 'em if they're embarrassed.

I have a blue tag on my car. I have arthritis and can't walk far. Sometimes I walk with a cane, but most days I don't. So would you think I was not handicapped if I left my cane in the back seat?

209 sattv4u2  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 12:15:20pm

re: #208 Alouette

I have a blue tag on my car. I have arthritis and can't walk far. Sometimes I walk with a cane, but most days I don't. So would you think I was not handicapped if I left my cane in the back seat?

no

210 Gepetto  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 12:16:20pm

re: #199 Obdicut

Newt is the one proposing that the Judiciary be hauled in front of Legislative panels to explain their decisions. Newt is not running to become a part of the Legislative branch, therefore, he must be constructing an argument for such a thing based on his eventual Presidency. I'm not sure how you can't see that President Newt requiring the Judiciary to be grilled by the Legislature is an immense power grab for the Executive branch. He's not running for Congress.

211 b_sharp  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 12:17:56pm

re: #208 Alouette

I have a blue tag on my car. I have arthritis and can't walk far. Sometimes I walk with a cane, but most days I don't. So would you think I was not handicapped if I left my cane in the back seat?

Teenagers popping out of a car without a blue tag is pretty straight forward, your situation not so much, but as long as the blue tag is there, the assumption is you need it.

212 Obdicut  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 12:18:19pm

re: #210 Gepetto

Newt is the one proposing that the Judiciary be hauled in front of Legislative panels to explain their decisions. Newt is not running to become a part of the Legislative branch, therefore, he must be constructing an argument for such a thing based on his eventual Presidency.

Even so, it'd be an expansion of legislative power, not of executive power, to have that be the case.

I'm not sure how you can't see that President Newt requiring the Judiciary to be grilled by the Legislature is an immense power grab for the Executive branch. He's not running for Congress.

Mainly this bit:

grilled by the Legislature

Do you care to deal with this following part at all, or prefer to just ignore it?

The GOP is attacking the judiciary on many levels, whether it's running campaigns to oust judges who rule in favor of gay marriage, asserting that congress can pass laws that ignore the Supreme Court, argue that Congress can subpoena judges and have them arrested, or claiming that the president can ignore the Supreme Court.

This is not explainable as part of a long-standing expansion of executive power, as you claimed.

This is about the judiciary often upholding civil rights in a way that pisses off the GOP.

213 Kronocide  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 12:18:26pm
Lawyer: "Doctor, before you performed the autopsy, did you check for a pulse?"
Witness: "No."
Lawyer: "Did you check for blood pressure?"
Witness: "No."
Lawyer: "Did you check for breathing?"
Witness: "No."
Lawyer: "So, then it is possible that the patient was alive when you began the autopsy?"
Witness: "No."
Lawyer: "How can you be so sure, Doctor?"
Witness: "Because his brain was sitting on my desk in a jar."
Lawyer: "But could the patient have still been alive nevertheless?"
Witness: "Yes, it is possible that he could have been alive and practicing law somewhere."
214 Feline Emperor of the Conservative Waste  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 12:21:41pm

re: #213 BigPapa

After my last case of serving jury duty none of those surprised me in the least.

215 darthstar  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 12:22:00pm

re: #208 Alouette

I have a blue tag on my car. I have arthritis and can't walk far. Sometimes I walk with a cane, but most days I don't. So would you think I was not handicapped if I left my cane in the back seat?

I wouldn't care. You have the tag.

216 Obdicut  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 12:22:06pm

This is fucking fantastic.

Hipster Ipsum

Artisanal filler text for your site or project.

217 sattv4u2  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 12:23:16pm

re: #213 BigPapa

Must have been the same lawyer

Lawyer: "And what did he do then?"
Witness: "He came home, and next morning he was dead."
Lawyer: "So when he woke up the next morning he was dead?"

218 Kronocide  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 12:24:12pm

Quite simply these new musings of Newt are not some linear expansion of power exerted by presidents over the legislative branch. This is an order of magnitude more damaging and sinister.

So comparing these ideas implemented by Newt to what previous presidents were doing is a mistake. MBF was not a dickardly assessment.

219 darthstar  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 12:24:24pm

re: #216 Obdicut

This is fucking fantastic.

Hipster Ipsum

Loser lorem.
/ (pretty cool, actually)

220 Gepetto  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 12:32:47pm

re: #212 Obdicut

One More Time.
Newts not running for congress, therefore he is not proposing a pure legislative branch power grab.
He is proposing an Executive Branch power grab, the execution of which would include him using the powers of the President to somehow assert a new authority to command the legislative branch to grill members of the judiciary.
This is far worse than you want to make it. This is the Unitary Executive on steroids.

221 darthstar  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 12:34:28pm

okay...time to move my ass for a bit.

222 Gepetto  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 12:38:14pm

re: #218 BigPapa

We are in agreement here. I see Newts proposals as an enormous ego-stoked inflation. He is not Presidential material.

223 Obdicut  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 12:38:42pm

re: #220 Gepetto

One More Time.
Newts not running for congress, therefore he is not proposing a pure legislative branch power grab.
He is proposing an Executive Branch power grab, the execution of which would include him using the powers of the President to somehow assert a new authority to command the legislative branch to grill members of the judiciary.

Nope. Nowhere does he say he'd command congress to do so. That's the bit you're making up to cram into your theory.

So you're just going to keep dodging this bit, right? Never actually going to address it?

The GOP is attacking the judiciary on many levels, whether it's running campaigns to oust judges who rule in favor of gay marriage, asserting that congress can pass laws that ignore the Supreme Court, argue that Congress can subpoena judges and have them arrested, or claiming that the president can ignore the Supreme Court.

This is not explainable as part of a long-standing expansion of executive power, as you claimed.

This is about the judiciary often upholding civil rights in a way that pisses off the GOP.


I mean, I know it screws with your lame Magical Balance Fairy attempt, but not even attempting to rebut it is pretty weak tea, don't you think?

224 Killgore Trout  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 12:42:50pm

Islamists win 70 percent of the vote in second round of Egypt elections

Unofficial results put Muslim Brotherhood ahead with 39 percent of the vote, Salafi Al Nour with 31 percent; liberal Wafd party wins 22 percent.

225 SanFranciscoZionist  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 12:45:56pm

re: #224 Killgore Trout

Islamists win 70 percent of the vote in second round of Egypt elections

And after the Muslim Brotherhood said they wouldn't run candidates, and everyone assured us they only had a tiny amount of support in the country.

226 Obdicut  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 12:46:13pm

re: #224 Killgore Trout

Those Wafd guys better have a great political game, or the Egyptian people are fucked.

How are the elections? Any allegations of fraud?

227 sattv4u2  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 12:47:46pm

re: #224 Killgore Trout

re: #225 SanFranciscoZionist

Violence continued on Sunday for the third day straight in Egypt,

The Islamists have been staying clear of the recent violence, fearing that they could jeopardize their electoral gains by taking part in the protests. Their stance has prompted many activists to accuse them of political opportunism.

Someones giving them great political advice!

228 Killgore Trout  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 12:51:04pm

re: #225 SanFranciscoZionist

And after the Muslim Brotherhood said they wouldn't run candidates, and everyone assured us they only had a tiny amount of support in the country.

Yeah, I think a lot of people were kidding themselves. I suppose there's still hope that the MB will be pragmatic modern leaders who will be peaceful but I'm not holding my breath. I think Egypt is probably fucked.

229 justaminute  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 12:52:07pm

Wow! I come home from work at the restaurant only to read LGF and the Headlines say the ultimately Gingrich wants a dictatorship and Romney wants a Theocracy. Gee, that sounds familiar. Where have I heard that from, oh yeah, a dictator wrapped up in a Theocracy. The Republicans must be fanboys of the Ayatollah Khomeini. Who knew?

230 Killgore Trout  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 12:52:52pm

re: #226 Obdicut

Those Wafd guys better have a great political game, or the Egyptian people are fucked.

How are the elections? Any allegations of fraud?

Unfortunately the elections seem pretty fair. I think the main sticking point is the military doesn't really want to hand the country over to the MB. I don't think there's much hope of stopping it.

231 SanFranciscoZionist  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 12:53:04pm

re: #228 Killgore Trout

Yeah, I think a lot of people were kidding themselves. I suppose there's still hope that the MB will be pragmatic modern leaders who will be peaceful but I'm not holding my breath. I think Egypt is probably fucked.

A lot of things can still happen, but I guess my best hope right now is 'meet the new boss, same as the old boss (but he says he's frum)'.

232 SanFranciscoZionist  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 12:53:41pm

re: #229 justaminute

Wow! I come home from work at the restaurant only to read LGF and the Headlines say the ultimately Gingrich wants a dictatorship and Romney wants a Theocracy. Gee, that sounds familiar. Where have I heard that from, oh yeah, a dictator wrapped up in a Theocracy. The Republicans must be fanboys of the Ayatollah Khomeini. Who knew?

Well, last night I discovered that Khamenei and I agree on a point of religious practice, so who knows?

/

233 Killgore Trout  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 12:54:24pm

re: #232 SanFranciscoZionist

Well, last night I discovered that Khamenei and I agree on a point of religious practice, so who knows?

/

Islamoconfederates!

234 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 12:58:14pm

I wonder if MB will gravitate towards the Salafite positions or will they become more moderate as a result of antagonism? What are the relations between MB and Al Nour?

235 sattv4u2  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 12:59:36pm

re: #233 Killgore Trout

Islamoconfederates!

It's all the rage!

236 sattv4u2  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 1:01:09pm

re: #228 Killgore Trout

re: #232 SanFranciscoZionist

re: #234 Sergey Romanov

Is there any other country where the MB holds a significant number of seats in a parliament/ congress/ house!?!?!

237 SanFranciscoZionist  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 1:04:07pm

re: #236 sattv4u2

re: #232 SanFranciscoZionist

re: #234 Sergey Romanov

Is there any other country where the MB holds a significant number of seats in a parliament/ congress/ house!?!?!

Uh, yeah, several. I think one of their spin-off groups even has a guy in the Knesset.

238 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 1:04:32pm

re: #236 sattv4u2

re: #232 SanFranciscoZionist

re: #234 Sergey Romanov

Is there any other country where the MB holds a significant number of seats in a parliament/ congress/ house!?!?!

Sure. However, I'm not sure if the "local chapters" are representative of each other.

239 albusteve  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 1:05:14pm

re: #166 recusancy

Yes.

Lol...haha

240 sattv4u2  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 1:06:56pm

re: #237 SanFranciscoZionist

Uh, yeah, several. I think one of their spin-off groups even has a guy in the Knesset.

I'm not asking of they have 'a'" delegate/ rep here or there

I'm asking in numbers where they have influence ,,, 25%,,, 33% ,,, ect

241 sattv4u2  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 1:07:21pm

re: #239 albusteve

2 streaks ended today

Green Bay lost

the Colts win!

242 sattv4u2  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 1:07:48pm

re: #238 Sergey Romanov

see 240

243 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 1:08:38pm

re: #242 sattv4u2

see 240

Yes, and I replied positively.

[Link: en.wikipedia.org...]

244 Killgore Trout  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 1:09:53pm

re: #240 sattv4u2

I'm not asking of they have 'a'" delegate/ rep here or there

I'm asking in numbers where they have influence ,,, 25%,,, 33% ,,, ect

I'm pretty sure they don't have a substantial influence in any legitimate democracy. This will be their first test run.

245 sattv4u2  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 1:10:27pm

re: #243 Sergey Romanov

Yes, and I replied positively.

[Link: en.wikipedia.org...]

Thanks

re: #244 Killgore Trout

I'm pretty sure they don't have a substantial influence in any legitimate democracy. This will be their first test run.

Yeah ,, thats why I was asking

246 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 1:12:09pm

re: #244 Killgore Trout

Whether this democracy is legitimate is pretty doubtful. The fact of the correctly counted votes alone does not a legitimate elections (and thus democracy) make.

247 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 1:13:06pm

re: #245 sattv4u2

Yeah ,, thats why I was asking

Your question did not mention legitimate democracies. Otherwise, there are countries with significant representation of MB.

248 SanFranciscoZionist  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 1:13:21pm

re: #240 sattv4u2

I'm not asking of they have 'a'" delegate/ rep here or there

I'm asking in numbers where they have influence ,,, 25%,,, 33% ,,, ect

Well, checking Wikipedia, I learn that:

In Bahrain, the Muslim Brotherhood is represented by the Al Eslah Society and its political wing, the Al-Menbar Islamic Society. Following parliamentary elections in 2002, Al Menbar became the joint largest party with eight seats in the forty seat Chamber of Deputies.

The Jordanian Brotherhood has formed its own political party, the Islamic Action Front, which has the largest number of seats of any party in the Jordanian parliament.[57]

In Iraq: After the fall of the Saddam Hussein regime in 2003, the Islamic Party has reemerged as one of the main advocates of the country's Sunni community. The Islamic Party has been sharply critical of the U.S.-led occupation of Iraq, but participates in the political process.[63] Its leader is Iraqi Vice-President Tariq Al-Hashimi. Also, in the north of Iraq there are several Islamic movements inspired by or part of the Muslim Brotherhood network. The Kurdistan Islamic Union (KIU) holds seats in the Kurdish parliament, and is the main political force outside the dominance of the two main secularist parties, the PUK and KDP.[64]

And of course: The Hamas takeover of the Gaza Strip in 2007 was the first time since the Sudanese coup of 1989 that brought Omar al-Bashir to power, that a Muslim Brotherhood group ruled a significant geographic territory.[74]

They do form their own spin-offs and styles and set their own agendas wherever they are, so it's hard to precisely assess them. They tend to be supressed wherever there's a secular or Shiite government, but usually pop up again later.

249 SanFranciscoZionist  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 1:15:32pm

re: #246 Sergey Romanov

Whether this democracy is legitimate is pretty doubtful. The fact of the correctly counted votes alone does not a legitimate elections (and thus democracy) make.

It's not the first election that makes a democracy. It's the third.

250 sattv4u2  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 1:16:34pm

re: #248 SanFranciscoZionist

Thanks

I'm lazy!
//

(really ,,, thanks)

251 jvic  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 1:35:20pm

re: #88 sagehen

re: #32 Lawrence Schmerel

If a president refuses to follow a Supreme Court decision, I think we have to rely on Congress to act.

In 1956, the Supreme Court declared segregated busing unconstitutional. Montgomery was integrated by court order as a result, but Eisenhower ignored the ruling and allowed segregation to continue in other places. This continued until Congress passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

I take a much more generous view of Eisenhower. He didn't much like the decision in Brown v Board, but he also believed that the Supreme Court outranked him -- so when they handed down a unanimous decree, by god he was going to enforce it. (also, no way in hell was he going to let some pissant southern governor use the national guard to thwart the 14th Amendment) -- with all of the United States Military to pick from he chose the 101st Airborne; those 9 black kids would be protected by the unit that led the way on D-Day.

1. Here is a photo of members of the 101st, with fixed bayonets, escorting, at Eisenhower's 1957 order, the black kids into Little Rock Central High.

From the NY Times report:

The President's decision to send troops to Little Rock was...one of historic importance politically, socially, constitutionally. For the first time since the Reconstruction days that followed the Civil War, the Federal Government was using its ultimate power to compel equal treatment of the Negro in the South.

2. As of this writing, Schmerel's post has received five updings whereas sagehen's historically apposite clarification has received only one other than mine.

252 b_sharp  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 1:35:35pm

re: #250 sattv4u2

Thanks

I'm lazy!
//

(really ,,, thanks)

Yah, despite all the rumours, SFZ is a good egg.

253 Obdicut  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 1:37:19pm

re: #251 jvic

He did also ignore segregation in other places, though.

254 OhCrapIHaveACrushOnSarahPalin  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 2:16:14pm

re: #253 Obdicut

He did also ignore segregation in other places, though.

Impossible.

Republican conservatives freed the slaves and love blacks. The Democrat Party is the Klan plantation.

255 Obdicut  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 2:17:47pm

re: #254 OhCrapIHaveACrushOnSarahPalin

Eisenhower wasn't really a Republican conservative. He was quite progressive.

Jvic's point was that Eisenhower actually did order a confrontation over segregation, for which he does deserve to be applauded.

256 jvic  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 2:32:57pm

re: #255 Obdicut

Eisenhower wasn't really a Republican conservative. He was quite progressive.

Jvic's point was that Eisenhower actually did order a confrontation over segregation, for which he does deserve to be applauded.

I basically agree although 'applauded' is a stronger term than I'd use. Ike deserves a full measure of credit.

257 OhCrapIHaveACrushOnSarahPalin  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 2:33:03pm

re: #255 Obdicut

Eisenhower wasn't really a Republican conservative. He was quite progressive.

Jvic's point was that Eisenhower actually did order a confrontation over segregation, for which he does deserve to be applauded.

e_e literalism

Did I really need to add sarc tags to that?

258 b_sharp  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 2:46:21pm

re: #257 OhCrapIHaveACrushOnSarahPalin

e_e literalism

Did I really need to add sarc tags to that?

Do we really have to admit some of us are compulsively pedantic?

259 Eclectic Infidel  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 2:56:45pm

re: #1 jaunte

Gingrich on Face the Nation:

Video at the link:
Newt Gingrich Would Send U.S. Marshals To Arrest ‘Activist’ Judges

This would be tantamount to fascism.

260 Obdicut  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 3:08:30pm

re: #257 OhCrapIHaveACrushOnSarahPalin

e_e literalism

Did I really need to add sarc tags to that?

Well, no, I treated you as though you were being sarcastic, not literal.

261 OhCrapIHaveACrushOnSarahPalin  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 3:13:49pm

re: #260 Obdicut

smh

262 OhCrapIHaveACrushOnSarahPalin  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 3:15:32pm

re: #258 b_sharp

Do we really have to admit some of us are compulsively pedantic?

Oh don't get me wrong, I was certainly grateful for that little history lesson!

///
///
/// < - added lots for good measure!

263 William of Orange  Sun, Dec 18, 2011 3:19:23pm

What happened to [Link: www.236.com...] ? This site was taken over by the Huffington Post and used as URL to their comedy section. Ever since the take over things have gone south, most imfamous their use of the HULU video format. I curse them into eternity for using that piece of crap software. Makes it impossible for us non-US citizens to watch video.

As of today I've never seen a clip online of Saturday Night Live. Go figure.

As of this month the last trace of 23-6 has been vanished from the internet. Shame on them.


This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

^ back to top ^

TwitterFacebook

Turn off all ads for a full year by subscribing!
For about 33 cents a day (per month) or 22 cents a day (per year), our subscription option turns off all advertisements at LGF!
Read more...

► LGF Headlines

  • Loading...

► Tweeted Articles

  • Loading...

► Tweeted Pages

  • Loading...

► Top 10 Comments

  • Loading...

► Bottom Comments

  • Loading...

► Recent Comments

  • Loading...

► Tools/Info

► Tag Cloud

► Contact

You must have Javascript enabled to use the contact form.
Your email:

Subject:

Message:


Messages may be published unless you request otherwise.
Tech Note:
Using the Contact Form
LGF Pages

This button leads to the main index of LGF Pages, our user-submitted articles. You can post your own LGF Pages simply by registering a free account with us.

Create a Page

This is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.

Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.

Last updated: 2014-03-07 2:19 pm PST

LGF User's Guide
Recent Pages
Randall Gross
Altan - Live Stream From the Frankie Kennedy Winter School 1/2014
Traditional Irish music live webcast with Altan & guests

6 hours, 54 minutes ago
Views: 79 • Comments: 0
Tweets: 0 • Rating: 0
Souliren
Natalie MacMaster Fiddle school
This is a short (under two minute) video of Natalie teaching a technique for "Athole Brose," in Cape Breton style.

11 hours, 29 minutes ago
Views: 76 • Comments: 0
Tweets: 0 • Rating: 1
FemNaziBitch
BRAVE NEW WORLD: E-Citizens Unite: Estonia Opens Its Digital Borders - 17 October 2014
Estonia has invited people to register as e-residents - a step towards a world where a person's identity online matters just as much as their identity offline ESTONIA flung open its digital borders last week. The eastern European country ...

17 hours, 44 minutes ago
Views: 145 • Comments: 1
Tweets: 0 • Rating: 1
HamSandwich
Goldsmiths University Students Union refuses to commemorate the holocaust, calling it “Eurocentric”
A motion was proposed at the Goldsmiths Students' Assembly yesterday to commemorate Holocaust Memorial Day and victims of genocide.Education officer Sarah El-alfy urged students to vote against the proposal, rejecting it as "eurocentric".This comes a day after it emerged ...

1 day, 12 hours ago
Views: 540 • Comments: 13
Tweets: 0 • Rating: -6
MichaelJ
Amazing RED Camera Footage Kelly Slater’s 540 Air
More: Amazing RED Camera Footage Kelly Slater's 540 Air There's a reason why people refer to 11-time world champ Kelly Slater as "the king". This clip/maneuver is yet another ground-breaking moment in the history of surfing.

2 days, 8 hours ago
Views: 326 • Comments: 3
Tweets: 6 • Rating: 5
Rightwingconspirator
1934 Had Worst Drought of Last Thousand Years-We Made It Worse
"It was the worst by a large margin, falling pretty far outside the normal range of variability that we see in the record," said climate scientist Ben Cook at NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York. Cook ...

2 days, 16 hours ago
Views: 410 • Comments: 0
Tweets: 0 • Rating: 4
Skip Intro
The Scablands: A scarred landscape as strange as fiction
arstechnica.com

6 days, 16 hours ago
Views: 659 • Comments: 2
Tweets: 0 • Rating: 3
Lumberhead
(SD Sen Race) Ellis: Why It’s a Close Race for Senate
The political world outside of South Dakota learned some stunning news last week: Mike Rounds, the guy everybody assumed would be the next senator from South Dakota, actually has been running a campaign more suited for sheriff of Mayberry ...

6 days, 20 hours ago
Views: 537 • Comments: 0
Tweets: 12 • Rating: 0
I Stand With Big Sodomy!
Daniel Johnston-True Love Will Find You In The End.
A simple, imperfect, brilliant song, by a fascinating man. Link

1 week ago
Views: 465 • Comments: 0
Tweets: 0 • Rating: 2
Bubblehead II
High Court Lifts Hold on Gay Marriage in Idaho
[large]YES![/large] WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court says same-sex marriage can go ahead in Idaho. More: High Court Lifts Hold on Gay Marriage in Idaho [large]YES![/large]

1 week, 2 days ago
Views: 673 • Comments: 1
Tweets: 12 • Rating: 2
 Frank says:

Why do you necessarily have to be wrong just because a few million people think you are?