"*" wrote in message
news:01b41e67$d8d44220$2993c3d8@race...


Hawke wrote in article
.. .



It's not really surprising that the court didn't agree with Bush's ideas
about law and liberty for those it incarcerates. Bush would just as soon
as
act like any other tin horn dictator on the block. Too bad for him we
have a
court that can reign him in. But it also shows why the coming election
is
so
important. The next president will appoint several justices during his
term.
It's critical that no more of the far right wing radical (Originalist)
justices get on this court. This decision was another 5 to 4 with the
four
radical right wingers all voting in lockstep. If they were to get even
one
more member all the decisions like this one would go the other way.
Decisions on abortion, civil rights, and on down the line all would go
the
way the radical right wing wants. On the other hand, if more liberal or
moderate justices are put on the bench it will negate the far right, nut
ball decisions the Bush appointees would make. So if we get Obama as
president we kill two birds with one stone. We get our civil rights back
that Bush has been taking away, and we get a long term majority on the
Supreme Court, which would set back the right wing's agenda back decades
if
not forever. So let's just make a new rule. No more old white men get to
be
president.

Hawke




Here we have a liberal breaking the posting rules of the newsgroup in
order
to grouse about others breaking rules.

Perfect liberal double-standard.

Of course, liberals have a "special dispensation"........


Was that your credibility that just flew down the road, Tweety?


And look who, of all people, is commenting on and participating in the
thread. If it bothers you so much that people discuss other topics you
should not get involved and butt out. But no, you would rather put your two
cents in and then whine about it. What a manly man you are.

Hawke