Just who is the Federalists Society

[Doc1]

...and yet "Lefty's" have no interest in the Council on Foreign Relations, Tri-Lateral commission

 

[Stormy Daniels]

The better question is what is the American Bar Association, and why should their collective opinion hold more weight than the Federalist Society?

If you have to ask such a question, then you don't care about the answer.

 

[Stormy Daniels]

FYI: The United States is a federalist nation, has been since its founding, not sure why you attempted to associate libertarians with Africa but I guess I can chalk it up to ignorance producing odd side effects.

Technically, federalist nation doesn't make any sense, as "nation" refers to a group of people based on geo-cultural identity, while "federal" refers to an organizational scheme of a polity. The United States is a federal state. The American people could perhaps be described as a composite nation.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

The better question is what is the American Bar Association, and why should their collective opinion hold more weight than the Federalist Society?

If you have to ask such a question, then you don't care about the answer.

Such a stupid statement. I know what the ABA is. Give me a reason to grant their opinion more importance.

Or not.

 

[Disir]

This thread, ladies and germs, is an Express admission by a leftard that she does not wish to abide by our "original" Constitution.

It's less to do with that and more to do with lack of understanding. Originalism doesn't mean reverting to the institution of slavery.

What do you call it, who are the working poor without insurance, the seniors who decide between pills and food, who are the one addicted to the drugs , the rich do not pay taxes, that taxes are paid my the middle class. Lets be honest here, the Koch brothers have trusts set up and don't pay taxes, they pollute and get away with it, and we worship them because why, they give us jobs so we can afford to eat. I think people need to wake up.

Sure, let's be honest, isn't that the group of people that you didn't want to be stuck with and why you supported immigration? Because Gates and H1B visas?

Either the Congress has the power or they do not. Either judges have the power or they do not. Either the executive office has the power or it does not.

The Congress is made of those who represent the States.

The Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies is a group of conservatives and libertarians interested in the current state of the legal order. It is founded on the principles that the state exists to preserve freedom, that the separation of governmental powers is central to our Constitution, and that it is emphatically the province and duty of the judiciary to say what the law is, not what it should be. The Society seeks both to promote an awareness of these principles and to further their application through its activities.

They want states to have the freedoms, yet they want to control California and NY, you know the Democratic states. Actually what they want to do is take over the government and states.

So, you have a problem with the separation of powers? In context, the state is a reference to the federal government and they are against writing legislation from the bench AKA those dang activist judges. There are no activist judges but that is besides the point.

States have "freedoms", it's the responsibilities they get all shady about. States also have limitations. "They" take over the States and you are complicit. The name of the game has been to focus on national crap and ignore what is going on in the States.

Never fear here is your back up to promote the Democratic Party and defend California and New York.
About ACS | ACS

Now you can continue to ignore the history and the documents and just wave your blue pom poms. Whew! That was a close one.

 

[Stormy Daniels]

Er... no... The United States isn't a majority rule democracy, it's a Republic with some democratic aspects, the individual constituent sovereign entities that make up the Republic commonly known as "The States" are closer to majority rule democracies but even with the states there are limits, for example the majority can't vote away your right to free speech.

The United States is a democratic republic. Democracy and republicanism aren't mutually exclusive. In fact, when our government was founded the idea of republican government was understood to be rooted in democratic operations. A legitimate republic demanded that representatives be democratically chosen by the people. While that didn't necessarily mean that all representatives had to be chosen directly by the people, the government could never be legitimate if it weren't anchored in a line of accountability to the people.

In the days of the Roman Republic the consuls were selected by the citizenry as heads of state. While the consuls appointed senators, the constitution effectively obligated the consuls to appoint magistrates upon the end of their terms. Magistrates were themselves elected by the people, and ultimate legislative power laid with the assemblies in the form of direct democracy.

Distinction between republican vs democratic government forms is mostly a new concept. Academically it's a distinction of limited value. If anything merit is gained from such a distinction it is that democracy is rightly understood as the engine that powers a republican form of government--or maybe even that it's a primitive form of republicanism--and is perhaps worth distinguishing between the kind of raw Athenian method that would be impractical for a state larger than a city and itself was less practical than the Roman style of democratic republicanism to which it gave way. But mostly it's been used in nonacademic discourse in recent times as a pseudo-intellectual attempt to dismiss the will of the people when advocating for policy that lacks popular support.

 

[Stormy Daniels]

The better question is what is the American Bar Association, and why should their collective opinion hold more weight than the Federalist Society?

If you have to ask such a question, then you don't care about the answer.

Such a stupid statement. I know what the ABA is. Give me a reason to grant their opinion more importance.

Or not.

You give yourself a reason every time you go to the doctor when you're sick, instead of asking the Federalist Society for medical advice.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

The better question is what is the American Bar Association, and why should their collective opinion hold more weight than the Federalist Society?

If you have to ask such a question, then you don't care about the answer.

Such a stupid statement. I know what the ABA is. Give me a reason to grant their opinion more importance.

Or not.

You give yourself a reason every time you go to the doctor when you're sick, instead of asking the Federalist Society for medical advice.

You could at least do your homework before spouting. Here's the easy wiki part.

Federalist Society - Wikipedia

There are far more crooks in the ABA than in my doctor's office, and also loons like the famous LGBT attorney who burned himself to death to protest global warming.

 

[Pete7469]

Good gawd.

You have to be a mole.

Moles are Rhodes Scholars compared to these imbeciles.

Unless you're implying they are enemy agents of the International Marxists.

I'd call them pawns if they had any brains, they're more like the board itself.

Anyway, as far as I'm concerned libertarian philosophy should be the foundation of how we practice law in this country. Statist pieces of shit these democrook judges all seem to be have no business anywhere near a gavel (or free to roam around in public for that matter). Obviously just because a republicrat nominates a judge does not mean they're not traitors to the Constitution also.

 

[regent]

Who were the federalist?
Federalists. Along with John Jay and Alexander Hamilton, James Madison penned The Federalist Papers. The supporters of the proposed Constitution called themselves "Federalists." Their adopted name implied a commitment to a loose, decentralized system of government.

Yes we are considered a federalist nation whereas the the states have ind. rule and a Fed Gov.

I have an idea , lets get rid of the military and just have state militias. No federal gov at all. Let ban the United in states. Does that sound good?

Every state has its own militia and I'm not talking the NG, I mean after all they are the ones who will get rid of the Fed Gov.

The Federalist Papers were letters to the editor and had the same power as these letters to the message boards. Madison was not a Federalist, he, Jefferson and others will begin the liberal party that will become the Democratic party of today.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Members of the society helped to encourage President George W. Bush’s decision to terminate a nearly half-century-old practice of rating qualifications for office for judicial nominees by the American Bar Association. Since the administration of President Dwight D. Eisenhower, the American Bar Association provided the service to presidents of both parties and the nation by vetting the qualifications of those under consideration for lifetime appointment to the federal judiciary. The society alleged that the bar association showed a liberal bias in its recommendations.[16][17][18]

The ABA is a very leftist organization that believes this:

The ABA applauds the improper application of constitutional principles. The ABA never met a law NOT related to Interstate Commerce or General Welfare.

FUCK THE ABA!!!!!

 

[EGR one]

Africa is a nation.

Why am I always the last to find out?

Its a continent. Its full of countries. They can start over there, they will even have Africa has lots of blacks , lets see them change them up again.

By the way, if they want to go back to the Constitution, that means we go back to slavery, or are they, the new conservatives going to pick and choose???

The Constitution included two provisions to discourage slavery.

The Democratic Party, however, emerged in the 1820s to challenge our principles and institutions.

No the society wants to go back to the original Constitution.

Wrong!!!
Our Purpose

• Law schools and the legal profession are currently strongly dominated by a form of orthodox liberal ideology which advocates a centralized and uniform society. While some members of the academic community have dissented from these views, by and large they are taught simultaneously with (and indeed as if they were) the law.

• The Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies is a group of conservatives and libertarians interested in the current state of the legal order. It is founded on the principles that the state exists to preserve freedom, that the separation of governmental powers is central to our Constitution, and that it is emphatically the province and duty of the judiciary to say what the law is, not what it should be. The Society seeks both to promote an awareness of these principles and to further their application through its activities.

• This entails reordering priorities within the legal system to place a premium on individual liberty, traditional values, and the rule of law. It also requires restoring the recognition of the importance of these norms among lawyers, judges, law students and professors. In working to achieve these goals, the Society has created a conservative and libertarian intellectual network that extends to all levels of the legal community.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

The Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies is a group of conservatives and libertarians interested in the current state of the legal order. It is founded on the principles that the state exists to preserve freedom, that the separation of governmental powers is central to our Constitution, and that it is emphatically the province and duty of the judiciary to say what the law is, not what it should be. The Society seeks both to promote an awareness of these principles and to further their application through its activities.

Amen.

Praise Odin.

 

[Disir]

We covered that starting with post #39.

 

[EGR one]

Er... no... The United States isn't a majority rule democracy, it's a Republic with some democratic aspects, the individual constituent sovereign entities that make up the Republic commonly known as "The States" are closer to majority rule democracies but even with the states there are limits, for example the majority can't vote away your right to free speech.

The United States is a democratic republic. Democracy and republicanism aren't mutually exclusive. In fact, when our government was founded the idea of republican government was understood to be rooted in democratic operations. A legitimate republic demanded that representatives be democratically chosen by the people. While that didn't necessarily mean that all representatives had to be chosen directly by the people, the government could never be legitimate if it weren't anchored in a line of accountability to the people.

In the days of the Roman Republic the consuls were selected by the citizenry as heads of state. While the consuls appointed senators, the constitution effectively obligated the consuls to appoint magistrates upon the end of their terms. Magistrates were themselves elected by the people, and ultimate legislative power laid with the assemblies in the form of direct democracy.

Distinction between republican vs democratic government forms is mostly a new concept. Academically it's a distinction of limited value. If anything merit is gained from such a distinction it is that democracy is rightly understood as the engine that powers a republican form of government--or maybe even that it's a primitive form of republicanism--and is perhaps worth distinguishing between the kind of raw Athenian method that would be impractical for a state larger than a city and itself was less practical than the Roman style of democratic republicanism to which it gave way. But mostly it's been used in nonacademic discourse in recent times as a pseudo-intellectual attempt to dismiss the will of the people when advocating for policy that lacks popular support.

I doubt you could find another sheeple that could compose a better excuse for ignoring the governmental structure established by our founders, in favor of an emerging dictatorship.

If you cannot find a significant difference between a republic and a democracy, you need to return to school. Democracy in America occurs mostly at the local level, and even then it is a rarity. Some referendums at the state level are democracy in action, but mostly citizens get to vote for a representative to vote their interests.

 

[Penelope]

So Democrats are under qualified.

For objectivity and independent thought, yeah most of 'em are WAY underqualified which explains why they became Democrat sheeple in the first place.

I suggest these white racist move to Africa and you can start over from scratch and go back in time to the 1800's. Then Africa can be a Libertarian nation or Federalist nation.

FYI: The United States is a federalist nation, has been since its founding, not sure why you attempted to associate libertarians with Africa but I guess I can chalk it up to ignorance producing odd side effects.

Its a democracy. It has always been maj rules.

Er... no... The United States isn't a majority rule democracy, it's a Republic with some democratic aspects, the individual constituent sovereign entities that make up the Republic commonly known as "The States" are closer to majority rule democracies but even with the states there are limits, for example the majority can't vote away your right to free speech. One would think that Sheeple-D would have learned that lesson after the Duchess of Benghazi lost to Donny the Clown even though she managed to garner a majority of the national vote.

In any case Federalism and Democracy aren't mutually exclusive.

Congress is maj rule. Why do they even vote???

The U.S. Congress as currently configured isn't majority rule.

Well why does the congress vote?

 

[Penelope]

So Democrats are under qualified.

For objectivity and independent thought, yeah most of 'em are WAY underqualified which explains why they became Democrat sheeple in the first place.

I suggest these white racist move to Africa and you can start over from scratch and go back in time to the 1800's. Then Africa can be a Libertarian nation or Federalist nation.

FYI: The United States is a federalist nation, has been since its founding, not sure why you attempted to associate libertarians with Africa but I guess I can chalk it up to ignorance producing odd side effects.

Its a democracy. It has always been maj rules.

Wow. The public school system sure did you wrong.

I suggest they did you wrong. We area democracy, like it or not. Take away the EC, even they go by maj vote.

 

[Penelope]

The better question is what is the American Bar Association, and why should their collective opinion hold more weight than the Federalist Society?

Gee lets see, maybe because the federalist society is all conservatives.

 

[Penelope]

I have no delusions anymore, we are not a democracy, we are run by the people with money.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

This entails reordering priorities within the legal system to place a premium on individual liberty, traditional values, and the rule of law. It also requires restoring the recognition of the importance of these norms among lawyers, judges, law students and professors. In working to achieve these goals, the Society has created a conservative and libertarian intellectual network that extends to all levels of the legal community.

I am not sure I agree with this part. What are traditional values?

Individual Liberty - the liberty of an individual to exercise freely those rights generally accepted as being outside of governmental control.
--Dictionary.com

Simple. Straight forward.

Traditional Values - the moral and ethical principles traditionally upheld and transmitted within a family, as honesty, loyalty, industry, and faith.
--Dictionary.com

I need to know what values are traditionally upheld and transmitted within a family. They listed some examples, but that is not exhaustive in the least. Dictionary.com uses the same definition as Traditional Values, so I turned to other sources.

In the United States, the banner of "family values" has been used by conservatives to fight abortion, gay rights, and major feminist objectives.
--Wikipedia, citing Seth Downland's Family Values and the Rise of the Christian Right

That definition of "Family Values" tends to make the "Traditional Values" plank conflict with "Individual Liberty" plank.

If they mean values like honesty, integrity, loyalty, industry, and faith, they should say those words, not words that have become associated with the suppression of individual liberty.

If they would eliminate this type of language from their writings, they would have broader support.