wrote in message
...
I have to say a Republican victory would be scary because Palin is way
too uneducated to inherit the presidency- reminds me of the
presidential candidate in the dead zone


Well, I've seen what the "educated" (I prefer the term indoctrinated) ones
do.
I'll take Saracuda over Biden 24/7/365.

I don't like lawyers and I want some semblance of conservative values
deciding which judges to nominate.

DC vs Heller was correctly decided 5-4.
It's scary that 4/9 ths of the "TOP" judges coudn't interpret one simple
sentence correctly because of their "Education" and leftist views.

The economic mess was caused by greedy politicians owned by the fat cats on
Wall street and now my grandchildren are in the hole because of the bail
out.

The D's had a far bigger hand in the Greed and stupidity, but even though
the Rs called for oversight and reform, they didn't actually DO ANYTHING
about it.

Mark

"Representation without taxation is as big a crime as vice-versa"




----== Posted via Pronews.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.pronews.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

"Mark Dunning" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
...
I have to say a Republican victory would be scary because Palin is way
too uneducated to inherit the presidency- reminds me of the
presidential candidate in the dead zone


Well, I've seen what the "educated" (I prefer the term indoctrinated) ones
do.
I'll take Saracuda over Biden 24/7/365.

Please, take her...and make sure it's far away. g


I don't like lawyers and I want some semblance of conservative values
deciding which judges to nominate.

DC vs Heller was correctly decided 5-4.
It's scary that 4/9 ths of the "TOP" judges coudn't interpret one simple
sentence correctly because of their "Education" and leftist views.

None of them interpreted the sentence, Mark. That's because the sentence
can't be interpreted -- or, looked at another way, it means just what you
want it to mean. And that's because it's not a simple sentence. It's a
nominative absolute, the most inherently ambiguous grammatical construction
the Founders could have used.

What the Court did, rather than interpret the sentence, is to look at the
surrounding history for guidance about what was *intended*. That's a
legitimate Supreme Court doctrine and I happen to agree with their
conclusion. But it leaves them with a dilemma for other cases they may
decide, because, if you know Supreme Court doctrines, what they did really
was to engage a very liberal doctrine of interpretation -- the same one,
without the window dressing, that gave us Griswold v. Connecticut and, thus,
Roe v. Wade. That's why Robert Bork, the consumate conservative judge, has
argued that the 2nd only confers a right for the states to form their own
militias. If you disagree with this I'll explain, but it's not something I'm
going to go over again unless there's a reason. A good reason will be if Roe
v. Wade ever comes up for review. If it does, and if the Court doctrine is
consistent with the Heller case, it will have to reaffirm the Roe decision.
And we know what anguish that would cause them. d8-) (Their solution
probably will be to switch doctrines. You'll have to watch carefully to
follow the pea under the shells.)


The economic mess was caused by greedy politicians owned by the fat cats
on Wall street and now my grandchildren are in the hole because of the
bail out.

There has always been greed on Wall Street and in Washington. The difference
this time is that they were operating under a conservative, economic
ideology of hands-off deregulation, and that gave them an opening as wide as
an open barn door. They rode in, packed up everything that wasn't nailed
down, and then rode out again, and the fools who believed in Reaganomics had
left no one there to watch the barn.


The D's had a far bigger hand in the Greed and stupidity, but even though
the Rs called for oversight and reform, they didn't actually DO ANYTHING
about it.

Where's your evidence that the Dems had a bigger hand in the greed and
stupidity? I don't see any reason to believe that greed or stupidity is a
political issue. Both have been around since men walked the earth.

--
Ed Huntress