BTW....there are four Supreme Court justices who are in their mid to late 70s at the moment and another four year Obama term could see him replacing several of them. Its an absolutely critical election this time, especially with Scalia, potentially retiring.
US Presidential Election: Tuesday November 6th, 2012
- Thread starter Team Brian GB
- Start date
- Status
This is something that really needs to be sorted. They need to get rid of lifetime appointments. These judges end up having a more important and lasting legacy than some presidents.
You don't think that rotten bastard will try to hang on until a Republican President can be elected?
That's kind of the the point of separation of powers.
Ginsburg is 79, so she is definitely not staying much longer. Scalia is 76 and Kennedy is 75, and even Stephen Breyer is 73. All of them should be replaced soon, hopefully in Obama's 2nd term. That would really screw the GOP on a lot of social issues going forward.
They're supposed to, the executive manages the government, the legislature creates the law and the judiciary interprets and enforces them.
With regards to the uncodified British Constitution it is the judiciary that was by far and away the most important part of the government in the creation of liberty and the system of government we have today and as a consequence the commonwealth realms and the United States.
Stare Decisis is the single most powerful block on our respective governments.
Always a big issue, a Presidents way to leave a truly lasting mark on the country.
There is occassionally talk about ending the lifetime appointments, limiting them to 10 years or something like that. I doubt see any kind of momentum for that to happen however.
The United States Constitution does not set out the powers of the judiciary as it does the executive or legislature so it would require the Supreme Court to downscale its own importance.
You'd need to amend the constitution. No way this'll get that sort of support.
It doesn't set out specific powers, but the lifetime appointment is quite clearly set out, meaning the amendment process would be how that'd change.
It does set out that justices have to be in good standing which can be interpreted in a whole myriad of different ways.
Obama first President in history to announce his support for gay marriage.
Respect +2.
Respect +2.
He leaves it to the states though as opposed to making it a fully fledged federal policy and therefore an election issue.
No I get that...but I'm not quite sure the founding fathers pictured the Supreme Court quite the way it is now...And I mean that both sides of politics. Democracts hoping Obama gets to appoint 2-3 justices so that 'liberals' can hold sway for the next 20 years and vice versa...
I think he will die as a judge. He is an evil bastard.
But there will be no more Republican Presidents in the foreseable future imo....assuming they remain the current whites only party.
Hispanics and Blacks will be the majority in 15 to 20 years and even now both groups are trending 80% and 90% respectively for Democrats.
A man like Lugar being defeated in teh primaries....
If I were a moderate Republican, I would be scared shit.
Wow. Well done Barack Obama. Historic!
just enough to get money off of rich gay-rights supporters, not far enough to actually have to do anything.
I don't think he would have done this if it wasn't backed up by polling data indicating it wouldn't thwart him in November.
It was made an election issue by Romney, who wants to make a federal law prohibiting same-sex marriage.
From the ABC news: http://news.yahoo.com/video/politic...gay-marriage-abc-news-exclusive-29243720.html
Interestingly, Shep Smith said the 'president was now in the 21st century' and described the Republicans as being 'on the wrong side of history' on the topic.
Also under "new stories" are:
Democrats Pick Felon Over Obama
Romney Pounces On Obama Marriage Flip Flop
Obama’s Food Czar Says Obesity Bigger Threat than Al Qaeda
Limbaugh: Shivers of Fear Sent Down Democrats’ Spine
Obama’s Real ‘War’ is Against the Elderly
Despite Boycott, Limbaugh Thrives as CNN and WaPo Collapse
Tea Party Poised for Gains in the Senate
Obama Uses 'Forward' Slogan 3 Times in 30 Seconds at 'Official' Tax-Payer Funded Speech
Hillary Gives Up on Makeup
Boeing CEO Blasts Obama
Romney Responds
He is the most moderate person they have, and also the most popular from what I can tell.
The republicans always campaign against abortion and same-sex marriage but it is a new one when a Democrat comes out in support of the contrary.
somebody needs to tell them that the man they claim is the greatest to ever live- an infallible super being worthy of worship as the true son of god lost a vote against a murderer, if people voting for someone else is a sign of shittiness...in this story a prisoner lost to Obama in a democratic primary in... WEST VIR-f#ckin-GINIA the most backward and racist state. Big woop
Edited: my information was incorrect
Not just that, but the law was very confusingly worded, once again you had to vote 'Yes' to ban gay marriage.
In polls, a majority of NC residents are in favour or gay marriage, as is the case nationally
I suspect Obama has looked at the numbers indicating the dispassion of young voters compared to 2008 and picked out the topic most likely to whip up indignation and inspire young liberals. It seems pretty obvious to me that marriage doesn't mean christian marriage and the state has no right to restrict someone's access to married status by gender.
nah, its about the gay donors to his presidential campaign. If it motivates his core voters thats great for him.. he doesn't spend much time thinking about them, tbh!
I hadn't done any reading into the subject before I took the guess that it was because donors were demanding more from him for their money, but it may be accurate
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...ve-order-punt/2012/05/07/gIQAPKsl8T_blog.html
Its always about the money with him
Although black voters tend to oppose gay marriage, they aren't exactly going to get all indignant and vote for Romney. The only people angered by Obama's statement today are those that would never vote for him anyway.
In ten years time everybody will laugh about this as even being an issue. I'm all for a party that seeks to expand civil rights rather than limit them.
In ten years time everybody will laugh about this as even being an issue. I'm all for a party that seeks to expand civil rights rather than limit them.
VA is changing a lot in the heavily populated and democratic areas of the DC suburbs. If you do a color coded map the vote hasn't changed much, just the total number of votes in specific districts.
I suspect parts of NC are similar with a lot of people moving down there from the north east cities to escape the hustle and bustle. They have a name for the areas in NC that are getting more populated but that name escapes me right now.
This chart suggests his timing is good
The Triangle(Raleigh, Durham, Chapel Hill), Triad(Greensboro, Winston-Salem, and High Point), and Charlotte. There's also Cary(Containment Area for Relocated Yankees) which is in the Triangle.
that's it' CARY!
This chart suggests his timing is good
interesting shape
Cary is a hellhole full of uptight, soulless people. It's just one huge HOA-turned-city. It's the epitome of suburbia.
The use of 'American' and 'Americans' is getting ridiculous now, it's like 8 million every speech. It seems like politicians are scared to use the word 'people' alone, and will either say 'American people' or just 'Americans'. Obama's doing it too, Dems obviously feel they have to up the ante to compete.
This chart suggests his timing is good
Both graphs are declining between 2000 and 2004. That seems.... irregular.
This chart suggests his timing is good
That explains it then, especially the fact that Obama/Biden were pro marriage between a man and woman in 08, but now that they have polling evidence that it won't hurt them in November, they've decided to publicly make the switch.
- Status