Name how elected democrats and republicans are different FLIP FLOPING aside

I'm sure this thread will sink like a rock because no one will be able to name how left are any different then the right flip flopping aside, by which I mean not what they promisse but by what they DO:

Both bailed out banks
Both unconstitutionaly used military
Both bailed out special interests
Both handed out welfare
Both are an absolute scum and a disease to America

And so on...

 

80% OF Elected GOP politicians NATIONALLY are Ardant Pro 2A , 75% of Elected Democrat POLITICIANS Nationally are Adamant Anti 2A .

 

Sigh. You are still peddling this garbage I see.

Stenberg v Carhart (2000)
O’Connor joined the liberal wing (Breyer, Ginsburg, Souter and Stevens), providing the key vote allowing the Court to overturne a Nebraska law banning a procedure known as "partial birth abortion." Subsequently, Congress banned the procedure in the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003; that law is on track to be argued before the Supreme Court. Abortion Overview
Gerrymandering:
Gerrymandering is the practice of manipulating electoral districts. In 1995, in Miller v. Johnson (5-4), O’Connor joined the conservative group, Chief Justice Rehnquist, Kenney, Scalia and Thomas, in ruling that Georgia's "geographic monstrosity" (racially-inspired) violated the Equal Protection Clause. In Veith v. Jubelirer (2004), the same five ruled that the Court cannot rule on gerrymandering if the intent is to disadvantage political adversaries.
Private School Vouchers:
Zelman v. Simmons-Harris (2002)
The Court approved a school voucher program in Ohio for low-income parents where most of the participants sent their children to religiously affiliated schools. The Court ruled this was not a violation of the First Amendment Establishment Clause. O’Connor voted with the more conservative faction, Chief Justice Rehnquist, Kennedy, Scalia and Thomas.
Racial Preferences in Admissions:
Grutter v. Bollinger (2003)
O'Connor wrote the majority opinion, joined by Breyer, Ginsburg, Souter and Stevens, which held that the University of Michigan Law School could use racial preferences to include blacks, Latinos, and Indians in its incoming class because of educational benefits associated with having a "critical mass" of minorities in the student body. O’Connor predicted that in 25 years racial preferences would no longer be necessary.
Religious Displays:
McCreary County v. ACLU of Kentucky (2005)
Because the First Amendment requires government to be neutral towards religion, the Court ruled that two Kentucky counties could not display copies of the Ten Commandments in their courtrooms because the displays had an overt religious purposes. O’Connor joined the more liberal justices: Breyer, Ginsburg, Souter and Stevens.

Start there.

http://uspolitics.about.com/od/supremecourt/p/swing_vote.htm

 

A smart poster once said there is one party, with two wings.

 

Yep, and yet hacks such as yourself attack one wing while at defending the other wing.

Says allot about you, huh?