DTs Mom and the Presidential Elections...

[Luzap]

DTs mom bringing suit against GM as a responsible party for his death is probably as good an example as any as to why this Presidential election is sooooo important.

All rhetoric aside, our Supreme Court has been weighted heavily to the liberal way of thinking for most of our lifetimes. Many of these Justices feel that the Constitution does not represent ironclad guarantees of protection against the government for our citizens, but rather that it is something that is subject to change according to their interpretation and the times.

Has this been all bad? No, these are still honorable people, but the course of our nation has been changed drastically.

We now live in a litigious society where the idea of personal responsibility comes second to that of ‘sue whomever you can get away with ~ they’re a big company and they’ve got a lot of money’. This attitude derives from many Supreme Court rulings that uphold the idea that some individual was not responsible for his (or her) own actions because of their environment, upbringing, race, education, circumstances, etc. These rulings all trickle down to our Federal and State Courts.

If Bush is elected, he will have the opportunity to appoint three (maybe four) Justices to this nine seat court ~ and effect the nature of personal responsibility for at least a generation.

We will have a Supreme Court that once again looks at the Constitution with the sanity of our Founding Fathers, and doesn’t attempt social engineering with the people of this country.

This suit should be thrown out of court.

Luz
This is the most important election you will ever vote in…


[This message has been edited by Luzap (edited 10-11-2000).]

[bkkcoh]

Luz,

AMEN



------------------
bk

[Donkey Drew]

That's a pretty ridiculous statement all around. Reagan and Bush had everybit the influence on that court as anybody. The damn Chief Justice is a die hard conservative.

It's also offensive to suggest that liberal thought is somehow un-American. It's also pure and simple stOOOOO-pid! Do you think seeking emancipation from the British Crown is, by definition, conservative? Do you think freeing the slaves (or questioning the scope of State's Rights) is, by definition, conservative? No, because although the tenents of 'liberal' and 'conservative' may change over time, the base definition remains. Conservatives champion the status quo while liberals champion shaking things up.

What a stupid *** statement.

[Clint in Wichita]

Forcing people to become more responsible by taking away a some personal responsibility? Nonsense. People should be free to file lawsuits for any reason they wish, for any amount of money they wish. It should be up to the judge and/or jury to arrive at a reasonable decision.

Altering some of the basic principals of the judicial system (like only allowing certain types of cases) is about as un-American as you can get.

I understand that you want a Republican president, and that's fine, but trying to sell your candidate to other BB members is silly, unless you're drawing a paycheck from the Bush campaign.

[Luzap]

Donkey Drew,

Just the thoughtful, classy, intelligent type of respnce I would expect from you.

I didn't say liberal thought was un-American. I simply stated what is common knowledge (and commonly accepted) by both sides and you called it "pure and simple stOOOOO-pid". [img]http://www.ChiefsPlanet.com/ubb/rolleyes.gif[/img]

Most people would agree that who we have as Supreme Court Justices effects the nature of our judicial system.

Luz
wake up!...<BR>

[RaiderCorporate]

Yeah, right...

Whether republican or democrat is in office the phrase “meet the new boss, same as the old boss” comes to mind immediately...<BR>

[bkkcoh]

Clint:

[i]People should be free to file lawsuits for any reason they wish, for any amount of money they wish. It should be up to the judge and/or jury to arrive at a reasonable decision[/i]

Unfortunately when law suits like this are filed, the company doesn't end up having to pay for the stupidity of the filer, the people of the US does. They do that in higher prices for the products that the company makes to make up for the lost money in the law suit. There should be judges that have enough common sense to throw cases out of the system if the case doesn't have enough merit to stand up. But all too often this doesn't happen.

If a product is used by a person the way the product is [i]not[/i] [b]intended[/b] and gets hurt, why should be company have to pay for the persons stupidity. But, if the person without the influence of drugs, alcohol or some other altering substance gets hurt usin an item the way it was designed, then they may have grounds for a law suit.

------------------
bk

[This message has been edited by bkkcoh (edited 10-11-2000).]

[Luzap]

Clint,

I'm sorry I wasn't more clear...

The rulings of our Supreme Court effect the rulings of all the courts in our country, down to the State and Local level.

Do you agree that giving prisoners convicted of rape and murder color TVs, weight rooms, air conditioning, reduced sentences, early paroll, etc. is the right thing to do?

This is a result of many years of liberal philosophy on the Supreme Court.

Luz
does that make more sense?...

[Donkey Drew]

"We will have a Supreme Court that once again looks at the Constitution with the sanity of our Founding Fathers..."

That statement seems to take a shot at the American flavor of the court to me.

Still, the ridiculous part of your statement is the idea that the court is somehow liberal leaning. Renquist, Souter, Scalia, Thomas, O'Connor, and one other that slips my mind-- all appointed by Republican Presidents. That gives that court a definate conservative leaning. Perhaps you ought to do your research before making stupid, misguided comments. Of course, you're the same person that think that teaching Christian dogma in public schools isn't a violation of the seperation of Church and State. So I'm not all that surprised.

[This message has been edited by Donkey Drew (edited 10-11-2000).]

[Luzap]

RaiderCorporate,

It is exactly your type of close-mindedness that this information should give pause to.

This is not about the day to day infighting of politics, it is about the philosophy of our freedom and has very real, far ranging effects on our society.

If you don't care about our society, that's your right, but be man enough to say so.

Luz
this is real life...

[Durtman]

Of course this new and improved Bush Supreme Court will emphasize "personal responsibility" as long as it isn't a woman exercizing her personal responsibility to choose how she uses her reproductive system. Let's get government out of our lives and into a woman's womb where it belongs!

[Luzap]

Donkey Drew,

Once again you have me confused with someone else ~ or maybe you're just confused period? I don't advocate a State religion.

Two very easy points to understand:

The trends we are talking about are the result of over 40 years of rulings. No one that I know on either side of the isle claims that the court has been anything but liberal for most of those years ~ capice?

Regardless of who is currently sitting on the Court, the next President will determin the philosophy (majority) on the court for generations to come.

Luz
is any of this difficult to grasp?...<BR>

[Mark M]

Okay, here we go again...

Let me preface by saying I have liberal tendencies, but won't vote for Gore (nor Bush, for that matter). Also, I partially agree with Luz...kinda spooky.

Clint--
Let everyone sue as they wish? If you're paying, then fine...the problem is that costs all of us money and wasted time. The Constitution ensures an expedient trial, but with everyone suing everyone else, that just doesn't happen anymore. It's a shame that a rapist can spend months in a luxury cell while the victim has to wait for closure...and even though tort actions and criminal are handled in different courts, the back log in one always affects the other.

DonkeyDrew--
Your comments aren't even worthy of a reply.

Raider Corp--
Very, very good point. It's not the president, but the people who have started this trend. The Court is just reacting to what people are doing in lower courts. They (the S.C.) then makes their rulings which in turn filter back down to the lower courts...it's a vicious cycle. But new justices could help stop this cycle...maybe not.

As far as DT's mother suing, I'm sorry, but THAT is stupid. I thought DT was a great player and a pretty good person. Far from perfect, but considering the likes of Bam, Strawberry and other classless goons, DT was a saint. However, it was his own fault that he died, not GM's. I find this sad, very very sad.

One more note...a Raider and a Bronco fan were ripping DT, saying that he got what he deserved and was not any kind of "saint" or "hero"...if one person is saved by wearing their seatbelt, and never wore one before DT's death, then he IS a hero.

MM--
Passed Political Science

[Donkey Drew]

I think you're mistaking Supreme Court justices for political hacks. These guys have intellectual pride and a committment to their craft. I think they formulate opinions from their well schooled brains and seasoned hearts, not from political ideology. The current court is made up of a majority of conservatives, so I'd say that's evidence enough that the constitution transcends the rantings of political idealogues. If the current conservative dominated court is liberal, the election of Dubya won't have any more impact that the election of Gore.

[Luzap]

Durtman,

I have no special desire to turn this into an abortion debate, but you hold a common miss-conception that should be laid to rest.

For the Justices that believe in strict interpretation of the Constitution, abortion is not a Federal issue ~ period.

There is little chance that these people will declair all abortions illegal. The only Supreme Court that made a Federal issue out of a personal decision was a liberal Court that declared that like minded people did NOT have the right to live in a community that supported their personal morals and ethics.

Thus the battle lines were drawn.

I agree with you, let's keep the Supreme Court out of the bedroom ~ unless you want them in the bedroom as long as they agree with you...

Luz
this is an important election...<BR>