OT: Supreme Court, heritage, etc. | <– Date –> <– Thread –> |
From: Tom Reynolds (kjtar![]() |
|
Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2007 08:50:51 -0800 (PST) |
Well, the Supreme Court has always been the subject of Presidential aspirations to influence the position/direction of future Court decisions. Vacancies on the Court are rare, so when they do happen, Presidents want to try as hard as they can to get a nominee confirmed who agrees with the current President's viewpoint on the Constitution and the role of the Federal government in relation to that of the various States and how it all effects the political, social, economic and legal fabric of America. Having said that, there are always what I might refer to as "trial balloons" that end up being passed hoping that either the Court will not visit the issue, or that the Court will agree to the issue, such as the line item veto that was passed only to be judged as unconstitutional. Generally, as we all know, strict constructionists tend to be conservative (or Republican leaning) and loose constructionists tend to be on the liberal or Democrat leaning viewpoints. But, largely I think it's a question of what seems correct and desirable now and for the considered future of the nation as a whole. And, to a past post of yours, I think that immigrants to the U.S. should speak attempt to learn and speak English as their first language. Of course had the Hartford Convention's vote changed a bit, we'd probably all be speaking German now, so...but I digress. This is not to say that anyone should forget their previous heritage, as has so often unfortunately been the case with Native American culture and society. Of course as it's largely been non-written and passed down verbally from generation to generation, it's an especially unfortunate situation. Live here, but don't forget your heritage is my viewpoint. Best continued regards and apologies for a longish (for me) post, Tom Reynolds Tulsa, OK (ancestors arrived here from England in 1629, BTW) ----- Original Message ----- From: "LarryT" <l02turner [at] comcast.net> To: "Tom Reynolds" <kjtar [at] cox.net> Cc: "The FerrariList" <ferrari [at] ferrarilist.com> Sent: Sunday, January 21, 2007 10:17 AM Subject: Re: [Ferrari] Ferrari Digest, Vol 6, Issue 35 > Ken wrote:<<you quoted Dr. Steve, not me>> > > Oops, Sorry, Ken & Steve -- > > Ya know, I think when McCain-Feingold was passed some who voted for it and > Bush who signed it, may have thought the Supreme Court would declare that > part of it unconstitutional. Lots of people were wrong - and lots of $$s > spent to take it all the way to the SC - just to have them show everyone > they care as little about the Constitution as most in the govt. I think the > vote was 5-4 BTW. Doesn;t mean much since the only real score is we (and > the Constitution) lost. > > Little by little the Const is becoming less and less relevant. I wonder > what could bring it back to the importance it deserves?? > > Larry T (67 MGB, 74 911, 78 240D, 91 300D) > www.youroil.net for Oil Analysis and Weber Parts > Test Results http://members.rennlist.com/oil > PORSCHE POSTERS! youroil.net > Weber Carb Info http://members.rennlist.com/webercarbs > Porsche Road Test http://members.rennlist.com/roadtest/ > . > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Ken Rentiers" <rentiers [at] mac.com> > To: "Larry Turner" <l02turner [at] comcast.net> > Cc: "The FerrariList" <ferrari [at] ferrarilist.com> > Sent: Sunday, January 21, 2007 6:08 AM > Subject: Re: [Ferrari] Ferrari Digest, Vol 6, Issue 35 > > > >I don't think that is the point. McCain-Feingold violates the First > > Amendment, but, nobody cares. I do. > > 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. > > > > Larry, you quoted Dr. Steve, not me. > > > > ken > > > > > > On Jan 21, 2007, at 12:14 AM, Brian E. Buxton wrote: > > > >> Interesting post, and I don't disagree with you, but voting records > >> are > >> readily available on the internet 24 hrs. a day. I believe you can > >> also > >> purchase a printed book each week/month/year from the Gov't. I have > >> also seen House and Congressional votes displayed live in a C-Span > >> channel more than once during the day > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > To unsubscribe or modify your subscription options, please visit: > > http://lists.ferrarilist.com/mailman/options/ferrari/l02turner%40comcast.net > > > > Sponsored by BidNip.com eBay Auction Sniper > > > > > > -- > > No virus found in this incoming message. > > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > > Version: 7.1.410 / Virus Database: 268.17.3/642 - Release Date: 1/20/2007 > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > To unsubscribe or modify your subscription options, please visit: > http://lists.ferrarilist.com/mailman/options/ferrari/kjtar%40cox.net > > Sponsored by BidNip.com eBay Auction Sniper > > > -- > Internal Virus Database is out-of-date. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.16.0/610 - Release Date: 12/30/06 > >
- Re: Ferrari Digest, Vol 6, Issue 35, (continued)
-
Re: Ferrari Digest, Vol 6, Issue 35 LarryT, January 20 2007
- Re: Ferrari Digest, Vol 6, Issue 35 Brian E. Buxton, January 20 2007
- Re: Ferrari Digest, Vol 6, Issue 35 Ken Rentiers, January 21 2007
- Re: Ferrari Digest, Vol 6, Issue 35 LarryT, January 21 2007
- OT: Supreme Court, heritage, etc. Tom Reynolds, January 21 2007
- Re: Ferrari Digest, Vol 6, Issue 35 Brian E. Buxton, January 21 2007
- Re: Ferrari Digest, Vol 6, Issue 35 red5hilser, January 21 2007
-
Re: Ferrari Digest, Vol 6, Issue 35 LarryT, January 20 2007
- OT: Voting records? Tom Reynolds, January 21 2007
- Re: OT: Voting records? LarryT, January 21 2007
Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.