|
6 months ago ::
Nov 28, 2011 - 9:41PM
#1
|
|
|
There is an article on The Federalist Society, and it submits that it's a right-wing neo-conservative organization of politicians, lawyers, judges, and law professors who are impeding federal governance while enabling corporations and banks. Members of the Federalist Society assert that “the province and duty of the judiciary to say what the law is, not what it should be.” However, the article says: "That assertion is problematic, though, because the judiciary interprets the Constitution and the law, and lawyers and judges can differ in their interpretations. That is why the judiciary should be non-partisan, impartial, objective and fair, which is why Justice is often symbolized by a blindfolded woman with the scales of justice in her hand." "In spite of that, the Federalist Society made their assertion specifically to counter more impartial progressive interpretations of the Constitution, and they assume that their point of view is “right” and that progressive points of view merely reflect unrealistic, wishful thinking." The article is at messenger2.cjcmp.org/federalist.html and it cites examples of the words and actions of Federalist Society members to show how their actions belie their words.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Nov 28, 2011 - 9:50PM
#2
|
|
|
My first contact with the Federalist Society was in law school and through contact with Scalia and Thomas--two "prominent" members. I was invited to a meeting--once--as a potential recruit--until I started asking questions and they realized that I was not going to "fit in."
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Nov 28, 2011 - 10:02PM
#3
|
|
|
My first contact with the Federalist Society was in law school and through contact with Scalia and Thomas--two "prominent" members.
I was invited to a meeting--once--as a potential recruit--until I started asking questions and they realized that I was not going to "fit in."
Yes, thank you for that. They march in lock step, to put it in a blunt but all too appropriate way. Most Americans are far too oblivious to and unaware of just how deep and insidious the right-wing takeover has been.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Feb 11, 2012 - 10:09PM
#4
|
|
|
I might add that many of the right-wing members of the Bush Regime were and are members of the Federalist Society, as are the right-wing members of the U.S. Supreme Court who have been responsible for such corporate-friendly decisions as Citizens United, which gave corporations and wealthy special interest groups to buy elections.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Feb 12, 2012 - 10:03PM
#5
|
|
|
Ah yes ... well that's ok remormationnow ... The Obama administration are all members of the International Socialists Party, and so are the other half of the court. Of course .. the US was "created" more in line with the Federalists point of view .. not the communists, socialists, maost point of view of the left wing conspiracy that took over this nation back in 1933, and hasn't looked back since. BTW ... the "bankers" ... are not Federalists .. they go on your side of that blind lady's scales. It was a Democrat that created the Federal Reserve for his Banking buddies. He knew it was wrong .. but what the hell ...
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Feb 12, 2012 - 10:32PM
#6
|
|
|
Ah yes ... well that's ok remormationnow ...
The Obama administration are all members of the International Socialists Party, and so are the other half of the court.
Of course .. the US was "created" more in line with the Federalists point of view .. not the communists, socialists, maost point of view of the left wing conspiracy that took over this nation back in 1933, and hasn't looked back since.
BTW ... the "bankers" ... are not Federalists .. they go on your side of that blind lady's scales. It was a Democrat that created the Federal Reserve for his Banking buddies. He knew it was wrong .. but what the hell ...
The Obama administration are all members of the International Socialists Party, and so are the other half of the court.
No they are not. I realize that the term neo con is often used as a perjorative but neos cons are really neo cons. They self identify. PNAC wrote up the blueprint for the war on terror. Members of PNAC call themselves neo cons. Rumsfeld, Bush and Cheney are signatories to this. I know there are left wing members as well. It is a business model, which is a cynical simplistic opinion of mine. Because it just seems everytime the neo cons pull off an operation they make lots of money. The pols that greenlight the neo con projects receive money too from the lobbyists. I do not see the citizens as getting anything out of that model. inceased security? hah! bringing democracy over there? hah! cui bono. I probably would not complain so much if they were buying butter insteads of guns and premptive war. The federal reserve was established in the early 1900's the turn of the last century
We can no longer allow our eating dollars and our political capital to continue feeding giant agribusiness corporations.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Feb 13, 2012 - 9:01AM
#7
|
|
|
The Obama administration are all members of the International Socialists Party, and so are the other half of the court.
Of course .. the US was "created" more in line with the Federalists point of view .. not the communists, socialists, maost point of view of the left wing conspiracy that took over this nation back in 1933, and hasn't looked back since.
Fantasy is no substitute for historical documentation in a debate. There's no way to refute it because no proof is offered.
catboxx.blogspot.com
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Feb 13, 2012 - 1:42PM
#8
|
|
|
There is a VAST difference between trying to establish a country to last and last (which founders aimed for), and morphing into an empire. It is the empire part (which benefits less than 1%), that's making the country fail.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Feb 13, 2012 - 8:45PM
#9
|
|
|
I have no problem with our building and rulling an empire...IF we were any good at it. We're not. Therefore I'm opposed to us building and rulling an empire. Ken
Conservative, Libertarian, Life member of the NRA and VFW
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Feb 13, 2012 - 11:11PM
#10
|
|
|
I have no problem with our building and rulling an empire...IF we were any good at it. We're not. Therefore I'm opposed to us building and rulling an empire.
Ken
We're no good at it because the principles upon with the original united States was built was not intended to build empires.
If anything, it has been our adopting the empire building nature of Europe, by emulating their systems. The Federal Reserve was created in 1918 and was signed into law by a Democrat, Woodrow Wilson. That laid the foundation. FDR, put the nation on the path of Europeanizaiton by adopting the policies of Fabianism, which was the non-violent twin brother of Communism. It is Socialistic by Nature, and always takes advantage of crises to implement. Thus, comming out of WWI, we got the Federal Reserve, which played a pivotal role in the Great Depression. Then we get FDR, who implements centralized mortgage and S.S. Then we have Viet Nam, and we get Medicare/Medicaid. Carter comes along with a recessed economy, and implements the CRA, forcing banks to loan money to people who could not afford houses, and Clinton put that program on steroids. Reagan, bargaining with a completely Democrat House and Senate expanded the EIC, and Clinton Expanded it yet again .. twice .. and then Bush the Dumb Ass did it yet again. EIC .. while some herald it as the "best poverty fighting tool we have" .. in reality, it is just wealth redistribution ala socialism style, and fosters dependence on Government and the Entitlement Mindset that has gripped the nation. PNAC??? .. we have a whole lot more bigger problems than PNAC and the "neo-cons". The neo-cons may be some sorry SOBs .. but they aren't the one's responsible for our 15 Trillion dollar debt. NO ... that debt is a direct result of socialism embedded in a capitalistic economy [the basics of Fabianism put in place by FDR]. It's motto ... "Capitalism in, Socialism out". The overwhelming majority of our debt and deficit issues stem from our Government Subsidized Existence.
|
|
|
