Obama and Boehner Speeches

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-20-2007
Obama and Boehner Speeches
46
Mon, 07-25-2011 - 9:46pm

What are your thoughts about it?

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-02-2009
Sun, 07-31-2011 - 9:21am

I think you already know that the Tea Party is for job creation and smaller government. Two things that are seriously lacking from Obama. I doubt they agree with that theory that tax hikes don't hurt job creation.

"Resist, we much. We must, and we much. About that, be committed."

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-03-2009
Sun, 07-31-2011 - 10:35am

Your rhetoric would be more convincing if it was backed by facts.

Jabberwocka

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-02-2009
Sun, 07-31-2011 - 11:32pm
jabberwocka wrote:

Your rhetoric would be more convincing if it was backed by facts.

"Resist, we much. We must, and we much. About that, be committed."

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-25-2006
Mon, 08-01-2011 - 1:29pm

Check out this book review, and keep in mind, it was published before Citizens United v.FEC, probably the most activist decision in the last century:

"Because it has implemented a new conservative constitutional jurisprudence while maintaining many of the liberal policies of the Warren and Burger Courts, Keck has dubbed the Rehnquist Court the “most activist court in history.” This is so for three specific reasons. First, since 1994, the Court has overturned more federal laws than at any other time in its history (p.203). Second, as illustrated by the case of BOERNE v. FLORES (1997), the Court has “declared its own authority in a confident tone, as its leading justices are committed to a strong conception of judicial supremacy” (p.203). Third, the Court has been willing to intervene in many important areas of law and policy. As Keck explains, “the later Rehnquist Court recognizes no ‘political thickets’ in which it is unwilling to exercise its power. BUSH v. GORE [2000] is the best example here” (208). Keck concludes the book with an attempt to explain the Rehnquist Court’s policymaking activism. He concludes that it is neither due to “Law without Politics” nor “Politics without Law.” Instead it is a result of the development of constitutional jurisprudence in the post-New Deal period and the interaction between law and politics. These factors are exemplified both by the continued liberal activism and the limited conservative activism of Justices O’Connor and Kennedy (pp.271-272).

My evaluation of Keck’s book is generally positive.

-----------------------------------------------
http://www.pnhp.org/news/2009/october/meet_the_new_health_.php

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DQTBYQlQ7yM

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-02-2009
Mon, 08-01-2011 - 10:48pm
janetlz wrote:

Check out this book review, and keep in mind, it was published before Citizens United v.FEC, probably the most activist decision in the last century:

How do you figure the Citizens United case to be an activist decision?

"Resist, we much. We must, and we much. About that, be committed."

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-03-2009
Thu, 08-04-2011 - 7:08pm

It's "off-base", "twisted" and "odd" to send out a rallying cry of spend, spend, spend after the nation was attacked.

Jabberwocka

Pages