View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Tanya Senior Chief Petty Officer
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 Posts: 570
|
Posted: Mon Jul 04, 2005 3:51 pm Post subject: Public ‘interest’ shouldn't mean money |
|
|
July 4, 2005
http://www.JewishWorldReview.com | "Do you know Nancy Pelosi? Her job is leading the Democratic Party in the House of Representatives. They should have asked for references. Here's her reaction to the Supreme Court's recent decision on "eminent domain":
"It is a decision of the Supreme Court," said the minority leader. "So this is almost as if G-d has spoken."
That's not the way Abraham Lincoln saw it:
"If the policy of the government upon vital questions affecting the whole people is to be irrevocably fixed by decisions of the Supreme Court . . . the people will have ceased to be their own rulers."
I'm with Abe. On this Independence Day weekend, the people might wish to give some thought as to how they might reclaim their independence from the G-d-like Supremes. Rule by the judicial interpretation of principles is problematic enough for some of us. But rule by the judicial interpretation of lack of principles takes us to dizzying new heights. Last week, in two rulings, the Supreme Court decided that (a) displays of the Ten Commandments are constitutional and (b) displays of the Ten Commandments are unconstitutional.
Don't worry: All nine judges aren't that wacky"
More here:
http://jewishworldreview.com/0705/steyn070405.php3 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
blue9t3 Admiral
Joined: 23 Aug 2004 Posts: 1246 Location: oregon
|
Posted: Mon Jul 04, 2005 4:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Good read, but seriously, who's house would you rather tp? pelosi's or hillarys? _________________ MOPAR-BUYER |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Me#1You#10 Site Admin
Joined: 06 May 2004 Posts: 6503
|
Posted: Mon Jul 04, 2005 4:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks for a new sig |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|