Election 2012

[Rabbitcreekok]

Found this on another forum. Posted here for you to consider.

Yes, a very serious threat to our society and recall that FDR tried to “pack” the Supreme Court. Oba is more threating than FDR who was the most dangerous President that I lived through, … until the current “Messiah”.

Columnist Andrew McCarthy gives us what probably is the most important question regarding the upcoming presidential election….

"…..if Mitt wins the nomination, as seems very likely, I will enthusiastically support his candidacy. For my friends who have hesitation on that score, I'd just ask you to keep four things in mind:


1. Justice Scalia just turned 78

2. Justice Kennedy will turn 78 later this year

3. Justice Breyer will be 76 in August

4. Justice Ginsburg turned 81 about a week ago.


We wish them all well, of course, but the brute fact is that whoever we elect as president in November is almost certainly going to choose at least one and maybe more new members of the Supreme Court in addition to hundreds of other life-tenured federal judges, all of whom will be making momentous decisions about our lives for decades to come.

So for anybody who is thinking of not voting because your favorite didn't get nominated, or writing in a candidate who can't win, imagine this: Supreme Court Justices Eric Holder and Hillary Rodham Clinton".

 

[Lurker66]

I highly doubt, Holder or Clinton would ever be considered for the SC. I see the comments as rhetoric or scare tactics.

It wouldnt be hard for me to not vote for Obama, but tired tactics wont convince me.

 

[Rabbitcreekok]

I highly doubt, Holder or Clinton would ever be considered for the SC. I see the comments as rhetoric or scare tactics.

It wouldnt be hard for me to not vote for Obama, but tired tactics wont convince me.

Perhaps you miss the point. He might not appoint either of those two, but his appointments, if he is re-elected would be someone like them.

 

[vvvvvvv]

Perhaps you miss the point. He might not appoint either of those two, but his appointments, if he is re-elected would be someone like them.

And what's to stop Romney from doing the same? With a Republican-controlled Senate (somewhat likely this cycle, appears to be very likely by 2014), any Republican Supreme Court nominee is a shoo-in, even if its the same person that Obama would have nominated.

The SCOTUS appointment process is definitely a good place for gridlock.

 

[Rabbitcreekok]

And what's to stop Romney from doing the same? With a Republican-controlled Senate (somewhat likely this cycle, appears to be very likely by 2014), any Republican Supreme Court nominee is a shoo-in, even if its the same person that Obama would have nominated.

The SCOTUS appointment process is definitely a good place for gridlock.

Somehow I just cannot see Romney appointing Holder or Clinton or anyone else like them. If he was dumb enough to do so, I would hope the Senate would reject his appointments. However, I don't see Romney doing anything like that.

 

[vvvvvvv]

Somehow I just cannot see Romney appointing Holder or Clinton or anyone else like them. If he was dumb enough to do so, I would hope the Senate would reject his appointments. However, I don't see Romney doing anything like that.

A Republican Senate wouldn't confirm those unless they came from Romney. I could see Romney nominating an Ashcroft or Gonzales.

 

[Lurker66]

A Republican Senate wouldn't confirm those unless they came from Romney. I could see Romney nominating an Ashcroft or Gonzales.

and that would suck.

 

[RidgeHunter]

This poll is flawed because there is a segment of the membership that won't publicly admit they don't fall in line with the majority here because they don't want to get dogpiled on. You're basically holding pitchforks and torches and asking for people to admit they're witches.

I'll probably go hunting and not vote. Unless Romney/The GOP/"conservatives" I listen to on a daily basis annoy me so badly I take initiative to vote for Obama just out of spite. It's getting damn close to that point.

You've gotta love OSA, what a cross section of people.

Saying OSA is a cross section of people is like saying Mickey D's has a wide range of culinary styles.

 

[redmax51]

This poll is flawed because there is a segment of the membership that won't publicly admit they don't fall in line with the majority here because they don't want to get dogpiled on. You're basically holding pitchforks and torches and asking for people to admit they're witches.

I'll probably go hunting and not vote. Unless Romney/The GOP/"conservatives" I listen to on a daily basis annoy me so badly I take initiative to vote for Obama just out of spite. It's getting damn close to that point.

Good plan, go hunting.

Saying OSA is a cross section of people is like saying Mickey D's has a wide range of culinary styles.

Really?? We've got conservatives, liberals, moderates, Republicans, Democrats, Independents, Christians, Jews, I'm not even going to mention occupations.OSA represents anything you can think of, even Extraterrestrials like yourself.

 

[Lurker66]

While i would like to think the poll is flawed, it is about split 80-20 which is about all one can expect in a red state such as ours.

So far most agree that both canidates suck, but most will vote for Romney just to boot Obama. I see no reason that would compel me to change my vote, just as i cant give them a reason to change thiers.