The Next Four Years

[candycorn]

Do I think Romney will appoint Rush Limbugh? No. Do I think he'll appoint hard working decent men/women like himself whom feel Roe must be overturned? Yes. Political affiliation or not...

Romney doesn't believe in a right to privacy. It's a foregone conclusion that any judge he would nominate would be a disaster.

Maybe...maybe not. Too big a risk to take though.

 

[Si modo]

Do I think Romney will appoint Rush Limbugh? No. Do I think he'll appoint hard working decent men/women like himself whom feel Roe must be overturned? Yes. Political affiliation or not...

Romney doesn't believe in a right to privacy. It's a foregone conclusion that any judge he would nominate would be a disaster.

Maybe...maybe not. Too big a risk to take though.

ZOMG! Feeeeeeeeeeeeeeeaaaaaar!

You askeeered.

 

[francoHFW]

Should Pubs be rewarded for putting us in this mess (WORLD DEPRESSION and dumbazz wars, huge growth of AlQaeda), and now paralyzing the gov't since 2/2010 (and they even lie about THAT)?

"No compromise, un-American Tea Party GOP" (TIME).

Why in the world do you vote for these disastrous, lying incompetents?

 

[francoHFW]

Romney's ACTUAL plan- Cut taxes on rich, destroy Medicare/aid, Health Reform, raise pentagon spending, cut regs on Wall St, worry about debt in 2035...BRILLIANT

 

[Rinata]

I am more concerned with the economy of our nation and our deficit, getting people back to work. We have a president who promised to take care of these things in the first three years of his administration and it has not happened. Instead we have seen cronyism, class warfare and scandals abound.

It's time for someone with the qualifications for leadership. Let's put the priorities straight.

If you really cared about these things you would not approve of the right wing lunatics in Washington wasting their time trying to repeal the healthcare act yet again. Or your candidate never revealing what in the hell he is going to do as president. And maybe taking to task your turtle face senator that said all of their time should be spent defeating President Obama. The GOP has done NOTHING for this country but get in the way.

You people need to put YOUR priorities straight.

 

[Si modo]

I am more concerned with the economy of our nation and our deficit, getting people back to work. We have a president who promised to take care of these things in the first three years of his administration and it has not happened. Instead we have seen cronyism, class warfare and scandals abound.

It's time for someone with the qualifications for leadership. Let's put the priorities straight.

If you really cared about these things you would not approve of the right wing lunatics in Washington wasting their time trying to repeal the healthcare act yet again. Or your candidate never revealing what in the hell he is going to do as president. And maybe taking to task your turtle face senator that said all of their time should be spent defeating President Obama. The GOP has done NOTHING for this country but get in the way.

You people need to put YOUR priorities straight.

Better check to make sure O-care will cover your liposuction.

 

[Murf76]

In the next four years, there will likely be at least 2 or 3 slots on the Supreme Court open up due to the age of the justices. Ruth Ginsberg is in questionable health and three othe justices (Kennedy, Scalia and Breyer) are all in their 70's.

If you're a woman who values the ability to make reproductive choices on your own, you should vote for the President since he is committed to letting you keep your right to make that choice.

It is the truth that the republican nominee has been on both sides of the abortion issue in the past. Where the nominee will end up when selecting a new justice and what litmus test he will apply to that selection is up in the air.

Even a swing of one vote could overturn Roe v. Wade. If given the opportunity, conservatives will take that chance to overturn this landmark ruling.

Just something to consider before you go into the polling place and fill out your ballot this November.

This is Candycorn and I approved this message.

Seriously?? Obama's last SC pick isn't too sure she can't force-feed you your broccoli, and we're supposed to be panic-stricken at the imminent revocation of Roe v. Wade under Romney? That's hilarious! Not even Reagan, Himself, was such a danger to "a woman's right to choose".

 

[Vel]

In the next four years, there will likely be at least 2 or 3 slots on the Supreme Court open up due to the age of the justices. Ruth Ginsberg is in questionable health and three othe justices (Kennedy, Scalia and Breyer) are all in their 70's.

If you're a woman who values the ability to make reproductive choices on your own, you should vote for the President since he is committed to letting you keep your right to make that choice.

It is the truth that the republican nominee has been on both sides of the abortion issue in the past. Where the nominee will end up when selecting a new justice and what litmus test he will apply to that selection is up in the air.

Even a swing of one vote could overturn Roe v. Wade. If given the opportunity, conservatives will take that chance to overturn this landmark ruling.

Just something to consider before you go into the polling place and fill out your ballot this November.

This is Candycorn and I approved this message.

Seriously?? Obama's last SC pick isn't too sure she can't force-feed you your broccoli, and we're supposed to be panic-stricken at the imminent revocation of Roe v. Wade under Romney? That's hilarious! Not even Reagan, Himself, was such a danger to "a woman's right to choose".

Seriously, under Obama, we're all losing our rights to choose. We've just been told by a court that Obama has added two to, that we can be taxed for doing nothing. We've been told that we no longer have the right to choose our own health insurance policy. It must now be approved by Papa Obama.

 

[Murf76]

Seriously, under Obama, we're all losing our rights to choose. We've just been told by a court that Obama has added two to, that we can be taxed for doing nothing. We've been told that we no longer have the right to choose our own health insurance policy. It must now be approved by Papa Obama.

I don't know why they're whining about Republican picks anyway. Roberts worked out pretty well for them on the last couple of big decisions. Maybe they're just wayyyy into broccoli?

 

[Vel]

I am more concerned with the economy of our nation and our deficit, getting people back to work. We have a president who promised to take care of these things in the first three years of his administration and it has not happened. Instead we have seen cronyism, class warfare and scandals abound.

It's time for someone with the qualifications for leadership. Let's put the priorities straight.

If you really cared about these things you would not approve of the right wing lunatics in Washington wasting their time trying to repeal the healthcare act yet again. Or your candidate never revealing what in the hell he is going to do as president. And maybe taking to task your turtle face senator that said all of their time should be spent defeating President Obama. The GOP has done NOTHING for this country but get in the way.

You people need to put YOUR priorities straight.

Romney has clearly stated what he intends to do as president. If you don't know his intentions, it's because you don't bother to pay attention.

 

[Papageorgio]

Do I think Romney will appoint Rush Limbugh? No. Do I think he'll appoint hard working decent men/women like himself whom feel Roe must be overturned? Yes. Political affiliation or not...

Romney doesn't believe in a right to privacy. It's a foregone conclusion that any judge he would nominate would be a disaster.

And what makes you believe Mr. hope and Change does? His selections at this point and time were terrible.

 

[Vel]

Seriously, under Obama, we're all losing our rights to choose. We've just been told by a court that Obama has added two to, that we can be taxed for doing nothing. We've been told that we no longer have the right to choose our own health insurance policy. It must now be approved by Papa Obama.

I don't know why they're whining about Republican picks anyway. Roberts worked out pretty well for them on the last couple of big decisions. Maybe they're just wayyyy into broccoli?

Sadly true. Roberts couldn't have done worse in that decision had he been handpicked by Ailinsky himself.

 

[Murf76]

You know, it could be that I've arrived at the ultimate understanding of Democrat politics.. it's about broccoli. I mean, what the hell else could it be?

 

[Murf76]

Uh oh... wasn't it George H.W. Bush who hated broccoli? Boooooooooshhh!!!

 

[Vel]

Uh oh... wasn't it George H.W. Bush who hated broccoli? Boooooooooshhh!!!

Yep. I hate broccoli too. It's amazing that those that will spend their time in fear that someone might take their right to terminate their unborn's life away from them can't see the choices that they are robbed of though ObamaTax. All they can see is that someone else will take care of them just as they did when they were children.

 

[Greenbeard]

Do I think Romney will appoint Rush Limbugh? No. Do I think he'll appoint hard working decent men/women like himself whom feel Roe must be overturned? Yes. Political affiliation or not...

Romney doesn't believe in a right to privacy. It's a foregone conclusion that any judge he would nominate would be a disaster.

And what makes you believe Mr. hope and Change does? His selections at this point and time were terrible.

It's a rather stark difference.

Romney:

STEPHANOPOULOS: But you’ve got the Supreme Court decision finding a right to privacy in the Constitution.

ROMNEY: I don’t believe they decided that correctly.

At times over the past hundred years, some justices of the Supreme Court did not carry out that duty. There were occasions when the Supreme Court declined to enforce the restrictions on power the Framers had so carefully enumerated. At other points, the Court created entirely new constitutional rights out of “penumbras” and “emanations” of the Constitution, abandoning serious analysis of the Constitution’s text, structure, and history.

-- mittromney.com

Obama:

And so my criteria, for example, would be-- if a Justice tells me that they only believe the strict letter of the Constitution-- that means that they possibly don't mean-- believe in-- a right to privacy that may not be perfectly enumerated in the Constitution but, you know, that I think is there . . .

Well, where does that come from? I think it comes from a right to privacy-- that may not be listed in the Constitution but is implied by the structure of the Constitution.

Mitt doesn't believe Americans have a right to privacy. Obama does.

 

[Si modo]

Romney doesn't believe in a right to privacy. It's a foregone conclusion that any judge he would nominate would be a disaster.

And what makes you believe Mr. hope and Change does? His selections at this point and time were terrible.

It's a rather stark difference.

Romney:

At times over the past hundred years, some justices of the Supreme Court did not carry out that duty. There were occasions when the Supreme Court declined to enforce the restrictions on power the Framers had so carefully enumerated. At other points, the Court created entirely new constitutional rights out of “penumbras” and “emanations” of the Constitution, abandoning serious analysis of the Constitution’s text, structure, and history.

-- mittromney.com

Obama:

And so my criteria, for example, would be-- if a Justice tells me that they only believe the strict letter of the Constitution-- that means that they possibly don't mean-- believe in-- a right to privacy that may not be perfectly enumerated in the Constitution but, you know, that I think is there . . .

Well, where does that come from? I think it comes from a right to privacy-- that may not be listed in the Constitution but is implied by the structure of the Constitution.

Mitt doesn't believe Americans have a right to privacy. Obama does.

Are either of them justices?

No need to answer - it's rhetorical. They aren't.

I'll leave THAT call, and the others to the REAL constitutional scholars on the bench.

*yawn*

 

[Greenbeard]

Are either of them justices?

To make the same inane point so many times in a thread on the presidential appointment power is fairly impressive. Kudos.

Those of us who do recognize our right, as American citizens, to privacy have no desire to see the Romneys and Borks of the world in any position from which they can launch new assaults on it.

 

[Murf76]

Mitt doesn't believe Americans have a right to privacy. Obama does.

You do understand, don't you, that under Obama, your last bowel movement is no longer private if you share information about it with your doctor in 2014, right? No subpoena, no warrent... your medical records are in the hands of bureaucrats. Get an STD? Treatment for depression, drug addiction, or ED?... all there for whatever government-appointed lackey HHS chooses to give access to, and for whatever purpose Congress chooses in the future.

Privacy? Yeah, BARACK OBAMA... the "privacy" president.

 

[Si modo]

Are either of them justices?

To make the same inane point so many times in a thread on the presidential appointment power is fairly impressive. Kudos.

Those of us who do recognize our right, as American citizens, to privacy have no desire to see the Romneys and Borks of the world in any position from which they can launch new assaults on it.

What can I say? Neither of them are justices.

But, if you want to worry you pretty little head about that, you won't be alone. The hysterical OP will form a support group for all of the folks who are so paralyzed with fear about this.

Share all your emotions with them...they will love the affirmations.