Conservative Judge J Michael Luttig's sadness over what's coming is palpable

[leftwinger]

If that's want the majority want they should get it through the legislative process not lying lib judges

The left discovered that they no longer have to consult the voters if at least 5 unelected black robes who serve for life will give it to them by judicial decree

Way way back CA voted ~70% against Gay (mac) marriage. How'd that end up? They did it anyway. Courts OKd it?

 

[Mac-7]

Way way back CA voted ~70% against Gay (mac) marriage. How'd that end up? They did it anyway. Courts OKd it?

Exactly

The courts have been ruling America for decades

 

[Superbadbrutha]

If that's what the majority want they should get it through the legislative process not lying lib judges

The left discovered that they no longer have to consult the voters if at least 5 unelected black robes who serve for life will give it to them by judicial decree

So if the majority of Americans want it, why in the hell did Conservative Judges ban it?

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

Never heard of the guy.

Of course you haven't. Not a bit surprised.

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

Why not just GO FUCK YOURSELF WITH A CACTUS?

Fuckin' braindead simp.

You're very thin skinned.

 

[d0gbreath]

There's absolutely no reason for a judge to have any political overtones whatever.

Ideally, anyway. That was certainly the case for well over 200 years in America.

Apparently Mac is not cognizant of that.

He retired his robe in 2006. He can be political now.

 

[The Duke]

So if the majority of Americans want it, why in the hell did Conservative Judges ban it?

Judges go by law, not popular opinion.

 

[XponentialChaos]

I fail to see why a judge should be "conservative" and not "impartial".

Yea. I’m sure people get nominated to the Supreme Court for being “impartial”.

 

[struth]

Here's an extended (45-minute) interview with former federal judge J Michael Luttig, who used to be revered by conservatives for his commitment to conservative values. Now, of course, he's written off as a RINO and an enemy of the MAGA movement. Why? Because he's horrified by what he is seeing and has spoken out about it.

He's obviously shaken by what has happened to his party. There are several poignant moments in this interview, but one that struck me was when he said:

"This is a tragic day for America...The trial will be an embarrassing spectacle to the United States of America. Not only is it the first trial of an American President for grave offenses against the United States, but that man will be on trial during a presidential campaign in which he himself is again campaigning for the presidency of the United States. Never again will the world be inspired by American democracy in the way that it has been since our founding almost 250 years ago."

He also points out that our Constitution simply did not, and could not, foresee a movement that wanted to bring down the very institutions that support it. That has been my concern since this began -- we are not equipped to deal with something our Founders didn't see coming.

He’s right on in that quote..what the demafasict are doing to a political rival has us looking more and more like Saddam’s Iraq

 

[struth]

So if the majority of Americans want it, why in the hell did Conservative Judges ban it?

Haha are you for real with this? They really don’t let you get educated on the demaklan plantation do they? Haha too think Judges make their rulings on popular vote? Haha. Wow

 

[Grumblenuts]

The rubes know the judges aren't impartial. This is just their feeble attempt to ignore and deflect from what a REAL conservative said.

 

[BackAgain]

Here's an extended (45-minute) interview with former federal judge J Michael Luttig, who used to be revered by conservatives for his commitment to conservative values. Now, of course, he's written off as a RINO and an enemy of the MAGA movement. Why? Because he's horrified by what he is seeing and has spoken out about it.

He's obviously shaken by what has happened to his party. There are several poignant moments in this interview, but one that struck me was when he said:

"This is a tragic day for America...The trial will be an embarrassing spectacle to the United States of America. Not only is it the first trial of an American President for grave offenses against the United States, but that man will be on trial during a presidential campaign in which he himself is again campaigning for the presidency of the United States. Never again will the world be inspired by American democracy in the way that it has been since our founding almost 250 years ago."

He also points out that our Constitution simply did not, and could not, foresee a movement that wanted to bring down the very institutions that support it. That has been my concern since this began -- we are not equipped to deal with something our Founders didn't see coming.

A ^ slovenly fallacy of “appeal to authority.”

And the silly, petty opening poster (Muck.1958) only uses that fallacy, here, because he likes what the supposed “authority” happens to be spewing.

 

[Mac1958]

A ^ slovenly fallacy of “appeal to authority.”

And the silly, petty opening poster (Muck.1958) only uses that fallacy, here, because he likes what the supposed “authority” happens to be spewing.

And he's a far better person than you could ever dream of being.

So, too bad.

 

[BackAgain]

And he's a far better person than you could ever dream of being.

So, too bad.

Nah. He’s a piece of shit. As you well know.

 

[Grumblenuts]

How is it Lib bias if the majority of the country thinks a woman should have the right to choose, even though, they might not agree.

One logically presumes poll responses to such questions indicate how the public would vote given a national referendum, i.e. in a pure democracy. Decided on its merits rather than due to partisan preference.

Political bias exists beyond simple presentation and understanding of view-points favouring a particular political leader or party but rather transcends into the readings and interactions among individuals undertaken on a daily basis.[3] The prevalence of political bias has a lasting impact with proven effects on voter behaviour and consequent political outcomes.[3]

With an understanding of political bias, comes the acknowledgement of its violation of expected political neutrality.[4] A lack of political neutrality is the result of political bias.

The obvious answer to your question is, "It's not." But Mac7 is a permanent train wreck of partisan bias + stupidity. You'd fair better pissing up a rope than attempting to converse with him. As I've noted before, he's clearly too short to even see over the steering wheel of his little red sports car.

 

[Mac-7]

So if the majority of Americans want it, why in the hell did Conservative Judges ban it?

What are we accused of banning that you think had majority support?

 

[sparky]

Comply mother phuker. And you are free. wink wink.

best you ever wrote 22

~S~

 

[sparky]

Judges go by law, not popular opinion.

sure, but what if the law's f*cked Duke?

~S~

 

[toobfreak]

Luttig is intelligent, articulate, humble, dignified, informed, thoughtful, gracious and profoundly patriotic.

^^^Mac must have gotten his dick sucked.

 

[Grumblenuts]

Judges go by law, not popular opinion.

And lavish gifts from billionaires with opinions.