The judicial nomination war started with Bork. Let’s end it with Gorsuch.

They will tell.

And so? Older people are cleaner and more respectful of the space. Kudos to them. Doesn't change the core ideals contained within either protest.

 

I'd say actions illuminate the core ideals.

 

The important point here is that history will show the Democrats (led by lying, cheating, and murdering Ted Kennedy) began this war. He slandered a good man in Bork. Kennedy was the greatest American demagogue of the 20th century.

I hope this practice ends with Gorsuch. I'm not optimistic.

 

How do you figure applying the 14th amendment of the constitution is unconstitutional? Lol

 

It's not possible for the judiciary to write law. This is basic grade school level civics.

 

Eh. Not really. Age is a better divider. Youth tend to be more anarchistic have a tendency not to understand that destroying a physical space doesn't equal 'bringing down the system'. Older folks understand the value of the physical space, which is commendable.

But the underlying themes of the issues plaguing the current system exist whether or not the individuals espousing them truly understand how they exist in the world.

And really, the Occupy (for lack of a better unifying ideal) movement and the Tea Party movement weren't so far apart. Both see the inequalities of the system, whereas the primary sources and the ways to fix it are where they diverge.

 

Yeah young people tend to be liberal, until they grow out of it.

Some don't. There are plenty of old violent leftists out there. Most of them are currently "teaching".

Well OWS and TP were both protests, but the similarities end there.

 

That's not an argument. That's less substance than Donald Trump ever gave in the 2016 Elections and that's saying something

 

Roe v. Wade was a case where the judiciary created new law.

Liberal judges often rule based on "fairness", ignoring the written law and granting (what they think) is a "fair" decision.

 

The court is not capable of creating law. They judge an existing law as being constitutional or not.

 

I was a helluva lot more liberal 15 years ago, that is true. But it doesn't mean I don't agree with a lot of the underlying ideas from those days. I just have a healthier understanding of where the other side is coming from and have even joined them on certain issues.

And if you don't see the underlying similarities then I doubt their is anything I'll be able to say so I guess we will have to agree to disagree.

 

The reality is that most conservative votes are "constitutional" in nature, where as most liberal votes seek only to advance the liberal agenda of the far left, at the expense of the Constitution.

The latest ruling of the federal judge in Hawaii is just the latest example of extreme judicial overreach by the far left, trampling on both federal law and the Constitution itself. I doubt you will find a liberal on this board who disagrees with the Hawaii judge's ruling, for the simple reason no liberal on this board has any regard for the Constitution or federal law.

 

Okay.

Sounds as though I got the translation correct then.

 

BORK’S REVENGE, A DISH SERVED VERY COLD:

On the Supreme Court, Democrats finally get their just deserts 31 years later.