Donate Now...........

[sstterry]

It is over with and everyone should get over it. Only time will tell whether the right one was elevated to the supreme court. So at the moment this is what we have. I really doubt that I will every have any thing come before the supreme court to affect me. The only thing that needs over thrown was the citizens united vote. To much Dark money in our politics.

Citizens United is a travesty for the Country. Corporations are a "legal fiction." As such, they are deemed to be the same a person under the law. They should be limited in the amount they can give the same as you and I. The problem still is the dark money spent on independent expenditures. A PAC can spend a gazillion dollars on their own as long as they don't coordinate *wink* *wink* with any official campaign.

 

[JMJ Farms]

Most don't realize that two total opposites Ginsburg and Scalia were the best of friends.

That's a valid point. Which leads me to a sincere question. Do liberal justices and conservative justices commonly vote against or with each other? Which leads to another question(s). If they are voting according to law, why wouldn't they vote the same way? Is it because they are voting based on their opinions? Or different interpretations of the law?

 

[True Grit Farms]

Most don't realize that two total opposites Ginsburg and Scalia were the best of friends.

That's a valid point. Which leads me to a sincere question. Do liberal justices and conservative justices commonly vote against or with each other? Which leads to another question(s). If they are voting according to law, why wouldn't they vote the same way? Is it because they are voting based on their opinions? Or different interpretations of the law?

Those are million dollar questions. How many actual liberal friends do you have? I have a lot more black friends than liberal friends.

 

[Bright Raven]

Most don't realize that two total opposites Ginsburg and Scalia were the best of friends.

That's a valid point. Which leads me to a sincere question. Do liberal justices and conservative justices commonly vote against or with each other? Which leads to another question(s). If they are voting according to law, why wouldn't they vote the same way? Is it because they are voting based on their opinions? Or different interpretations of the law?

Those are million dollar questions. How many actual liberal friends do you have? I have a lot more black friends than liberal friends.

No. Those are cheap questions. I bet Steve will answer them free of charge.

 

[JMJ Farms]

Most don't realize that two total opposites Ginsburg and Scalia were the best of friends.

That's a valid point. Which leads me to a sincere question. Do liberal justices and conservative justices commonly vote against or with each other? Which leads to another question(s). If they are voting according to law, why wouldn't they vote the same way? Is it because they are voting based on their opinions? Or different interpretations of the law?

Those are million dollar questions. How many actual liberal friends do you have? I have a lot more black friends than liberal friends.

I'm pretty sure that I'm in the same boat.

 

[Bright Raven]

That's a valid point. Which leads me to a sincere question. Do liberal justices and conservative justices commonly vote against or with each other? Which leads to another question(s). If they are voting according to law, why wouldn't they vote the same way? Is it because they are voting based on their opinions? Or different interpretations of the law?

Those are million dollar questions. How many actual liberal friends do you have? I have a lot more black friends than liberal friends.

I'm pretty sure that I'm in the same boat.

Mike

Is it wise to go out in a boat with Vince? I hope he is a better skipper than he is an attorney. I thought everyone knew the difference in direct testimony and hearsay.

;-)

 

[JMJ Farms]

Those are million dollar questions. How many actual liberal friends do you have? I have a lot more black friends than liberal friends.

I'm pretty sure that I'm in the same boat.

Mike

Is it wise to go out in a boat with Vince? I hope he is a better skipper than he is an attorney. I thought everyone knew the difference in direct testimony and hearsay.

;-)

Figuratively speaking, I'm pretty sure in this case that the boat we are in together is relating to the comparison to the number of black friends we have being substantially more than the number of liberal friends we have. This boating trip has nothing to do with hearsay or direct testimony or being a lawyer.

But yes, I would say Grit is an excellent skipper. As many times as he's been out to sea and returned, I would literally go out in a boat with him as well.

 

[Bright Raven]

I'm pretty sure that I'm in the same boat.

Mike

Is it wise to go out in a boat with Vince? I hope he is a better skipper than he is an attorney. I thought everyone knew the difference in direct testimony and hearsay.

;-)

Figuratively speaking, I'm pretty sure in this case that the boat we are in together is relating to the comparison to the number of black friends we have being substantially more than the number of liberal friends we have. This boating trip has nothing to do with hearsay or direct testimony or being a lawyer.

But yes, I would say Grit is an excellent skipper. As many times as he's been out to sea and returned, I would literally go out in a boat with him as well.

Just don't let him give you any legal counsel. Lol

 

[sstterry]

Most don't realize that two total opposites Ginsburg and Scalia were the best of friends.

That's a valid point. Which leads me to a sincere question. Do liberal justices and conservative justices commonly vote against or with each other? Which leads to another question(s). If they are voting according to law, why wouldn't they vote the same way? Is it because they are voting based on their opinions? Or different interpretations of the law?

When it gets to the level of the Supreme Court there is no law or it is an interpretation of whether the "law" is unconstitutional. They definitely do not always vote as a block or not as a block. Most of us see the news about the "hot button" issues. The majority of the Opinions are not what we all look at and they are varied in the votes.

The Consitution is a living and breathing document and always has been. If we went strictly by the words, then a black man(not a woman) would be counted as 3/5ths of a person. Times and attitudes change and so does the interpretation. That is why philosophy is important when selecting a Justice.

 

[sstterry]

Ok, guys, there is not an evil empire here, on either side. There are differing views and the new world of 15-minute news cycles has subverted the real principals of the Constitution. The real problem is us fighting amongst ourselves which is exactly what the Russians wanted. Instead of compromise, we are "win at all costs" and meanwhile our Country is going to hell on the World Stage.

A few months ago I posted about the fact that we should work together and a couple of vocal posters said "hell no". That is the problem with current politics. Up until the 90's, we had elections, but those elected worked together for the good of the country. It has descended since then. Bill Clinton and Bob Dole ran against each other, but would have late night phone calls and discuss bills and their mothers!

Don't be so sure that with the new makeup of the Supreme Court that Roe will be overturned. That will cause a civil war and the Justices know that. Gay marriage was upheld, but have any of your lives really changed because of it (other than being pissed off or elated)?

We are going through a tough time now. We did during the whole Civil Rights era. Trust me, there were people much more passionate about making people of color equals than those upset today. We got through it though and we will get through this. Some of us may not like the change, but we will adapt. With all the consternation in these threads, if I ask a question in a cattle-related thread, the people who dislike me here will be the first to offer help and that is what gives me hope for our country!

 

[True Grit Farms]

Ok, guys, there is not an evil empire here, on either side. There are differing views and the new world of 15-minute news cycles has subverted the real principals of the Constitution. The real problem is us fighting amongst ourselves which is exactly what the Russians wanted. Instead of compromise, we are "win at all costs" and meanwhile our Country is going to be nice on the World Stage.

A few months ago I posted about the fact that we should work together and a couple of vocal posters said "be nice no". That is the problem with current politics. Up until the 90's, we had elections, but those elected worked together for the good of the country. It has descended since then. Bill Clinton and Bob Dole ran against each other, but would have late night phone calls and discuss bills and their mothers!

Don't be so sure that with the new makeup of the Supreme Court that Roe will be overturned. That will cause a civil war and the Justices know that. Gay marriage was upheld, but have any of your lives really changed because of it (other than being be nice off or elated)?

We are going through a tough time now. We did during the whole Civil Rights era. Trust me, there were people much more passionate about making people of color equals than those upset today. We got through it though and we will get through this. Some of us may not like the change, but we will adapt. With all the consternation in these threads, if I ask a question in a cattle-related thread, the people who dislike me here will be the first to offer help and that is what gives me hope for our country!

That's all great on paper and in print. There was room for compromise in the Reagan era, the evil empire put an end to it. The ultra left has been winning for way to long. Give me a few examples of anything the right has won in the last 28 years? The right hasn't even been able to keep what it had, much less add to it. We give and they take. We need to take lessons from the protesters on the left and fight for our rights. Sitting by and being polite hasn't worked.

 

[Bestoutwest]

There are cases where people are convicted on circumstantial evidence, which this was. But that doesn't matter. He was tried in the public court and found guilty, Guilty, GUILTY!!!!!

Guilty in the court of public opinion? I guess that counts for something but it does not raise to the threshold of being found guilty by a judge or jury. Or on his own confession of guilt. He forcefully denied any guilt.

I just wanted to be sure you understood my statement that she "seemed credible" as a witness. I was not meaning that to state that she provided corroborating evidence to prove her accusations or that anyone else provided corroborating evidence to prove her accusations.

Court of public opinion counts for squat, and that's a good thing.

 

[TennesseeTuxedo]

There are cases where people are convicted on circumstantial evidence, which this was. But that doesn't matter. He was tried in the public court and found guilty, Guilty, GUILTY!!!!!

Guilty in the court of public opinion? I guess that counts for something but it does not raise to the threshold of being found guilty by a judge or jury. Or on his own confession of guilt. He forcefully denied any guilt.

I just wanted to be sure you understood my statement that she "seemed credible" as a witness. I was not meaning that to state that she provided corroborating evidence to prove her accusations or that anyone else provided corroborating evidence to prove her accusations.

Court of public opinion counts for squat, and that's a good thing.

I look forward to the meltdown on the left when ole Ruth moves on and Trump nominates Amy Coney Barrett for the court.

That'll be very entertaining.

 

[greybeard]

The least credible witness is almost always the one that takes the stand to testify on their own behalf.