PDA

View Full Version : liberals show their ignorance:OH BOY!!! Cristry is DONE as a republican Vice Presiden



Carol
01-23-2012, 03:32 PM
link
(http://www.democraticunderground.com/12513909)

Star Member bigdarryl (7,205 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore


OH BOY!!! Cristry is DONE as a republican Vice Presidential in 2012 or a Candidate in 2016
http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2012/01/gov_christie_nominates_two_for.html


Gov. Christie nominates two for state Supreme Court, including gay African-American mayor

TRENTON — Gov. Chris Christie today nominated an openly gay African-American Republican mayor and an assistant state attorney general to the state’s highest court.

Christie nominated Phil Kwon, who worked under Christie when he was U.S. attorney, and Bruce Harris, who was elected mayor of Chatham Borough in November. Kwon, of Bergen County, would be the first Asian-American to sit on the state Supreme Court.

"I am honored to nominate these two gentlemen," Christie said at a Statehouse news conference. "I trust the Senate will take into account their extraordinary backgrounds and experience and will give them swift hearings.”

I imagine when it's clear that conservatives are simply shrugging their shoulders at the "openly gay" part and applaud the "Republican mayor" part, (assuming the individual is really a conservative) they will screetch about conservatives being "bigots" like they are doing now with Newt and "family values".

BlueDemOhio (12 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore
2. That will be hard for him to explain

during the primaries when you must play to the crazies

Star Member AlinPA (12,443 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore
3. He is finished in the republican party. Could you see him campaigning in South Carolina?!!
It seems like the far left are NEVER able to disassociate an issue with a person. If you don't want gay marriage to be legal.......you hate gays. If you think that abortion is murdering an unborn child and therefor should be illegal....you hate women.

Somehow their development got arrested and they cannot separate a person, and their worth, from what they identify with. Hence their hatred of all conservatives and anyone who doesn't agree with what they think and believe.

Carol
01-23-2012, 03:41 PM
And with this thread they reaffirm that gay people and people whose skin is not white should not venture off the plantation and think for themselves.

link (http://www.democraticunderground.com/101432778)


JackBeck (11,827 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore


Gov. Christie nominates two for state Supreme Court, including gay African-American mayor


Star Member KamaAina (39,933 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore
1. Let me guess. He's against funding poor school districts and affordable housing


And, how does an openly gay AA repuke sleep at night?!

Sera_Bellum (68 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore
2. Hmmmm

"...openly gay African-American..."

There are many, many things not logical with that. (Republican) that is.

Hugabear (7,938 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore
5. Imagine how lonely he would be at the Repuglican Convention

Star Member William769 (20,705 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore
7. If nothing else this is good news for the Gay community.

Thanks for posting.

linda22003
01-23-2012, 03:44 PM
link
(http://www.democraticunderground.com/12513909)




I imagine when it's clear that conservatives are simply shrugging their shoulders at the "openly gay" part and applaud the "Republican mayor" part, (assuming the individual is really a conservative) they will screetch about conservatives being "bigots" like they are doing now with Newt and "family values".



I'm still trying to figure out who "Christry" is. :rolleyes:

noonwitch
01-23-2012, 03:56 PM
And with this thread they reaffirm that gay people and people whose skin is not white should not venture off the plantation and think for themselves.

link (http://www.democraticunderground.com/101432778)


Well, you could just guess that was the next place they'd go.

DumbAss Tanker
01-23-2012, 04:31 PM
The New Jersey Supreme Court has been so messed up for so long that there isn't anything he could do that could possibly make it worse. It is generally known in prosecution circles as 'The Seven Dwarves." When I lived there, they had successfully thrown out something like 36 death penalties in a row using increadingly ridiculous rationales that would have been laughed out of the trial court for obviously-flawed legal reasoning, but of course they're the State Supreme Court, so there's no place for the State to take that to; by and large the Defendant only has to win once on appeal to get out of the dirtnap.

NJCardFan
01-23-2012, 11:52 PM
The New Jersey Supreme Court has been so messed up for so long that there isn't anything he could do that could possibly make it worse. It is generally known in prosecution circles as 'The Seven Dwarves." When I lived there, they had successfully thrown out something like 36 death penalties in a row useing increadingly ridiculous that would have been laughed out of the trial court for obviously-flawed legal reasoning, but of course they're the State Supreme Court, so there's no place for the State to take that to; by and large the Defendant only has to win once on appeal to get out of the dirtnap.

This, of course, was before the state did away with the DP completely.

txradioguy
01-24-2012, 05:56 AM
Despite what the Dummies want to believe...Christie is no Conservative. Not in the sense they want us to believe. He is fiscally conservative...but the rest of him is RINO through and through.

I shoulder shrug not only at his choice but at the typical pavlovian response the Dummies give to it.

Everything...right down to the cereal they eat...is a political decision.

Novaheart
01-24-2012, 11:36 AM
link
(http://www.democraticunderground.com/12513909)




I imagine when it's clear that conservatives are simply shrugging their shoulders at the "openly gay" part and applaud the "Republican mayor" part, (assuming the individual is really a conservative) they will screetch about conservatives being "bigots" like they are doing now with Newt and "family values"


I guess I am naive, but I don't see a proper role for political affiliation in being a judge. I have some very strong opinions, some opinions which get me labelled by various people as a nazi or a hippie, but on the bench I would take very seriously my mandate to be objective. In legal matters I always seek support in the Constitution, perhaps the hardest read of the Constitution, the one which isn't compromised by religious or other "deeply held beliefs".

I am furious at all of the Supreme Court justices at all times. Through some twist of logic, language, and philosophy they have all managed to violate the trust of the American people by allowing executive and police powers to trample the First, Second, and Fourth Amendments notably.

In Michigan Dept. of State Police v. Sitz (sobriety checkpoints) we have a case in point. The Supreme Court has allowed this evisceration of the Fourth Amendment under the ruse of a compelling state interest. The Republicans were the majority in this opinion.

There is no "My team is best" in this regard. That's why I laugh when Republicans or Democrats wring their wrists about the importance of "this election" because the President will get the chance to nominate new justices. They are only brilliant when you agree with them, they are bums at all other times. But more to the point, they don't vote on party lines, they vote based in the case law leading up to the case in point. So one bad ruling 100 years ago (like Kim Wong Ark) is the gift that keeps on giving.

Starbuck
01-24-2012, 12:32 PM
..........That's why I laugh when Republicans or Democrats wring their wrists about the importance of "this election" because the President will get the chance to nominate new justices. They are only brilliant when you agree with them, they are bums at all other times. But more to the point, they don't vote on party lines, they vote based in the case law leading up to the case in point. So one bad ruling 100 years ago (like Kim Wong Ark) is the gift that keeps on giving......

But it is important which President appoints new judges - or at least it can be. Kim Wong Ark; Dred Scott; Roe vs Wade; these are history changing decisions. I would much rather Anthony Scalia (Reagan appointment) make decisions based on interpretation that Ruth Ginsberg (Clinton appointment).

DumbAss Tanker
01-24-2012, 01:29 PM
This, of course, was before the state did away with the DP completely.

The legislature eventually said "With the Seven Dwarves overturning every one of them, what's the fucking point?"

It costs a lot more to litigate a DP case, and they decided it was a futile waste of money to try.

Arroyo_Doble
01-24-2012, 01:36 PM
But more to the point, they don't vote on party lines, they vote based in the case law leading up to the case in point. So one bad ruling 100 years ago (like Kim Wong Ark) is the gift that keeps on giving.

Are you serious?

Oh, yea. You're Nova. Nevermind.

noonwitch
01-24-2012, 01:54 PM
If the dummies are judging conservative thought overall by the posts at Free Republic on this topic....

Seriously, the posters over there are for the most part very angry with Christie for appointing a "sodomite" to a high court position. There are a lot of very ignorant posts over there, expressing hatred for Christie for allegedly betraying their christian values.


Mitt Romney can't pick another RINO to be his running mate, but a conservative like Newt can.

txradioguy
01-24-2012, 01:59 PM
Seriously, the posters over there are for the most part very angry with Christie for appointing a "sodomite" to a high court position. There are a lot of very ignorant posts over there, expressing hatred for Christie for allegedly betraying their christian values.



They are right to be outraged. Just because a Lib like you disagrees doesn't mean they are wrong.

That would be akin to me bitching about the DUmmies not supporting someone that's a more Conservative Democrat on their website.

Arroyo_Doble
01-24-2012, 02:06 PM
If the dummies are judging conservative thought overall by the posts at Free Republic on this topic....

Seriously, the posters over there are for the most part very angry with Christie for appointing a "sodomite" to a high court position. There are a lot of very ignorant posts over there, expressing hatred for Christie for allegedly betraying their christian values.


Mitt Romney can't pick another RINO to be his running mate, but a conservative like Newt can.

I don't know about that but Mark Levin was pissed at him yesterday for criticizing Newt.

Odysseus
01-24-2012, 02:49 PM
Are you serious?

Oh, yea. You're Nova. Nevermind.

Wong Kim Ark vs. United States is not the best reasoned decision in the history of the court. The court's finding that persons born to parents who were neither citizens nor residents of the United States wasn't supported by the original intent of the 14th Amendment. The expansive definition of "subject to the jurisdiction of the United States" took a requirement that was commonly understood to mean legally bound to the United States by ties of citizenship. It was meant to exclude the children of non-citizens who would be citizens of another nation due to jus sanguinis, or who were not tied to the United States by virtue of membership in independent indian tribes. The framers of the amendment would have been highly shocked to hear it argued that persons who had illegally entered the country and were flouting the laws governing citizenship were subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.

The law banning the naturalization of Chinese immigrants was unjust, and certainly flouted the equal protection clause, which would have been a stronger argument against it. Same result, better reasoning and better precedent.

michaelsean
01-24-2012, 05:26 PM
They are right to be outraged. Just because a Lib like you disagrees doesn't mean they are wrong.

That would be akin to me bitching about the DUmmies not supporting someone that's a more Conservative Democrat on their website.

Appointing a gay person isn't the Republican equivalent of being a conservative Democrat. I'm not sure of the conservative doctrine that says gay people shouldn't serve in government.