Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

ACLU Opposes Kavanaugh's Appointment to SCOTUS

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post

    Wrong. They normally don't endorse or oppose candidates. But, they make exceptions.



    https://www.aclu.org/blog/executive-...-supreme-court

    The others are William Rehnquist, Samuel Alito, and Robert Bork. All four were / are staunch Conservatives.
    Where did you see the "wrong"?

    Tuebor asked when was the last time the ACLU endorsed a candidate, and my response was that they do not endorse candidates. You just verified what I said. Also, opposing just 4 judges in 98 years doe not prove that they are leftist! You did not even bother to show why they opposed them!

    As I showed, the ACLU also opposed more strict gun background checks for disabled people. The difference between me and you is that I understand that such response does not "prove" that they are right-wing gun nuts.
    My most dangerous mission: I landed in the middle of an enemy tank battalion and I immediately, started spraying bullets killing everybody around me having fun up until my computer froze...

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
      One thing is clear to all Americans at this point: NO candidate put forth by the Democrats can be allowed to survive the hearing. Fair is fair, after all.
      Lessee... 20 Supreme Court Judges confirmed in the last half-century, since 1967: 16 Republicans, 4 Democrats. And when the Dems looked like possibly getting an actual majority for the first time, their pick was stonewalled by the Republicans until there could be a change in administration, after which Republican candidates were bulldozed through.

      More like nothing has changed and nothing will change in the US.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by ljadw View Post

        The Ford Foundation is not pro business, it is,as most foundations, very liberal .When Soros and the Ford Foundation are both funding the ACLU,it is obvious that both are very left wing .
        It funds the Tides Foundation,tied to Soros,the pro-Castro Center for Constitutional Rights, the National Lawyers Guild, the anti-Semitic University of Michigan, where students were forced to listen to a speech of a former Black Panther who said that there was no difference between Hitler and Netanyahu.
        When I googled Ford Foundation, the first thing I read was :The Ford Foundation Center for Social Justice,I am old enough to know what this means .
        All organisations funded by the Ford Foundation are very left wing .
        Source : Thoughts of a conservative Christian .
        In 1977 Henry Ford II resigned from the Ford Foundation as protest .
        An other foundation, the Johnson Foundation supported Elizabeth Pocahontas Warren.
        No links no case!

        But you were successful in showing us the definition of a circular argument.

        You basically argue that the AcLU is a leftist organization because it is funded by leftists like Soros, and when you were shown that conservative institutions fund the ACLU too, you argued that they are not conservative because they fund the ACLU and therefore they are leftist.

        LOLOLOL

        One does not have to be a genius to realize that the ACLU must get donations from both the left and the right. Pointing selectively at only certain organizations without showing the full list is a typical deceptive tactic!

        Another deceptive tactic is to make claims without posting links when you "google" things!
        Your words are dismissed again..
        My most dangerous mission: I landed in the middle of an enemy tank battalion and I immediately, started spraying bullets killing everybody around me having fun up until my computer froze...

        Comment


        • #34
          Ford Foundation Center for Social Justice : Social Justice is Marxist phraseology . Something Pamak especially should know .
          For the rest, unless you can convince Soros to pay me $ 750000 , do your work yourself, I am not your butler .

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by Johan Banér View Post
            Lessee... 20 Supreme Court Judges confirmed in the last half-century, since 1967: 16 Republicans, 4 Democrats. And when the Dems looked like possibly getting an actual majority for the first time, their pick was stonewalled by the Republicans until there could be a change in administration, after which Republican candidates were bulldozed through.

            More like nothing has changed and nothing will change in the US.
            I guess I'm an optimist, and I never underestimate the power of angry Americans in large groups.

            BTW, for the record, I'm not a Republican - I'm an Independent.
            Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes? Who is watching the watchers?

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by ljadw View Post
              Ford Foundation Center for Social Justice : Social Justice is Marxist phraseology . Something Pamak especially should know .
              For the rest, unless you can convince Soros to pay me $ 750000 , do your work yourself, I am not your butler .
              Ohh, you are not the butler because we ask you too much to post a link! It is sooooooo challenging right?
              Of course it is! Because whenever I actually DID check your links in the past by myself, I discovered things you wanted to hide since they did not fit your agenda! THIS IS WHY YOU DO NOT POST LINKS!

              Case dismissed!
              You work for YOUR argument! You do not expect others to do the job for YOU!]
              Also, it is idiotic to expect a philanthropic organization to have a language that does not talk about social justice in one way or another!
              My most dangerous mission: I landed in the middle of an enemy tank battalion and I immediately, started spraying bullets killing everybody around me having fun up until my computer froze...

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by pamak View Post

                No links no case!

                But you were successful in showing us the definition of a circular argument.

                You basically argue that the AcLU is a leftist organization because it is funded by leftists like Soros, and when you were shown that conservative institutions fund the ACLU too, you argued that they are not conservative because they fund the ACLU and therefore they are leftist.

                LOLOLOL

                One does not have to be a genius to realize that the ACLU must get donations from both the left and the right. Pointing selectively at only certain organizations without showing the full list is a typical deceptive tactic!

                Another deceptive tactic is to make claims without posting links when you "google" things!
                Your words are dismissed again..
                The ACLU derives a large portion of its income from defending known criminals, for which the various states (i.e., taxpayers) foot the bill. Whether or not the ACLU wins the case is immaterial to them - they get paid anyway. They file a constant stream of cases there is no hope of winning merely to collect the fees.

                During my nine years as a medical officer for the state prison system, I encountered these dirtbags on numerous occasions. I m proud to say that I never lost to them.
                Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes? Who is watching the watchers?

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post

                  The ACLU derives a large portion of its income from defending known criminals, for which the various states (i.e., taxpayers) foot the bill. Whether or not the ACLU wins the case is immaterial to them - they get paid anyway. They file a constant stream of cases there is no hope of winning merely to collect the fees.

                  During my nine years as a medical officer for the state prison system, I encountered these dirtbags on numerous occasions. I m proud to say that I never lost to them.
                  If the criminals have rights which are violated, then it is part of their mission to defend them ESPECIALLY since others do not do it. Also, I doubt that they charge the criminals or the people who are defended for such services! Nor is it cheap to have lawyers to file anything! Covering OPERATING costs is different from making profit!
                  My most dangerous mission: I landed in the middle of an enemy tank battalion and I immediately, started spraying bullets killing everybody around me having fun up until my computer froze...

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by pamak View Post

                    Ohh, you are not the butler because we ask you too much to post a link! It is sooooooo challenging right?
                    Of course it is! Because whenever I actually DID check your links in the past by myself, I discovered things you wanted to hide since they did not fit your agenda! THIS IS WHY YOU DO NOT POST LINKS!

                    Case dismissed!
                    You work for YOUR argument! You do not expect others to do the job for YOU!]
                    Also, it is idiotic to expect a philanthropic organization to have a language that does not talk about social justice in one way or another!
                    The ACLU is very selective these days about the cases they take, and the causes they support. Their agenda generally aligns with the Left, and they generally don't take cases that push Conservative values. That is, they have become politically biased.

                    Abortion and illegals... The ACLU is all for the government paying.

                    https://townhall.com/columnists/robe...ssion-n2399198

                    The ACLU also supports illegals having full rights to just being short of full citizenship without being citizens, attacks any and all cases for voter ID, is pro gun control, is generally anti-religion-- except Muslims of course--, and in general supports a full slate of Progressive causes while all but ignoring non-Progressive ones.

                    https://www.theacru.org/aclu-outrages/

                    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...iberties_Union


                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
                      The ACLU is very selective these days about the cases they take, and the causes they support. Their agenda generally aligns with the Left, and they generally don't take cases that push Conservative values. That is, they have become politically biased.

                      Abortion and illegals... The ACLU is all for the government paying.


                      https://townhall.com/columnists/robe...ssion-n2399198

                      The ACLU also supports illegals having full rights to just being short of full citizenship without being citizens, attacks any and all cases for voter ID, is pro gun control, is generally anti-religion-- except Muslims of course--, and in general supports a full slate of Progressive causes while all but ignoring non-Progressive ones.

                      https://www.theacru.org/aclu-outrages/

                      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...iberties_Union

                      In case you missed it, the courts which have been right wing controlled for decades have ruled in all these cases in favor of all the things that you find them part of the "leftist agenda" From the rights of illegal immigrants to the rights of abortions. In other words, the agenda you point as "leftist" is in fact a reflection of the mainstream society. it is just that YOUR agenda is TOO FAR to the RIGHT, so you find anything that opposes your beliefs as being "leftist." And I see an unsubstantiated claim that somehow the ACLU pushes for excessive rights in favor of the illegals. The last case I can recall involving the ACLU defending the rights of illegal immigrants was the one about the issue of separating families. But , of course, the lunatic right finds such human rights for the illegal immigrants too much!

                      Oh and by the way, based on the information (which I did not know) that was provided earlier by another poster that 16 out of of the last 20 judges were conservatives, we see one more reason to dismiss your claim that the ACLU has a leftist bias because it opposed 4 republican judges. In mathematical l terms, assuming that you accept that Lady luck does not have a right or left bias, the probability of randomly picking 4 republican judges out of a pool of 20 in which 16 judges are republicans, is about 38%.

                      (16/20) *(15/19)*(14/18)*(13/17)= 0.3756 so about 37.6%
                      Last edited by pamak; 08 Oct 18, 16:43.
                      My most dangerous mission: I landed in the middle of an enemy tank battalion and I immediately, started spraying bullets killing everybody around me having fun up until my computer froze...

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by pamak View Post
                        Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
                        The ACLU is very selective these days about the cases they take, and the causes they support. Their agenda generally aligns with the Left, and they generally don't take cases that push Conservative values. That is, they have become politically biased.

                        Abortion and illegals... The ACLU is all for the government paying.


                        https://townhall.com/columnists/robe...ssion-n2399198

                        The ACLU also supports illegals having full rights to just being short of full citizenship without being citizens, attacks any and all cases for voter ID, is pro gun control, is generally anti-religion-- except Muslims of course--, and in general supports a full slate of Progressive causes while all but ignoring non-Progressive ones.

                        https://www.theacru.org/aclu-outrages/

                        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...iberties_Union

                        In case you missed it, the courts which have been right wing controlled for decades have ruled in all these cases in favor of all the things that you find them part of the "leftist agenda" From the rights of illegal immigrants to the rights of abortions. In other words, the agenda you point as "leftist" is in fact a reflection of the mainstream society. it is just that YOUR agenda is TOO FAR to the RIGHT, so you find anything that opposes your beliefs as being "leftist." And I see an unsubstantiated claim that somehow the ACLU pushes for excessive rights in favor of the illegals. The last case I can recall involving the ACLU defending the rights of illegal immigrants was the one about the issue of separating families. But , of course, the lunatic right finds such human rights for the illegal immigrants too much!

                        Oh and by the way, based on the information (which I did not know) that was provided earlier by another poster that 16 out of of the last 20 judges were conservatives, we see one more reason to dismiss your claim that the ACLU has a leftist bias because it opposed 4 republican judges. In mathematical l terms, assuming that you accept that Lady luck does not have a right or left bias, the probability of randomly picking 4 republican judges out of a pool of 20 in which 16 judges are republicans, is about 38%.

                        (16/20) *(15/19)*(14/18)*(13/17)= 0.3756 so about 37.6%


                        The political leanings of the courts is irrelevant to the political leanings of the ACLU. I pointed out that the ACLU has selectively taken cases with a bias to the Left. That has nothing to do with the bias of the courts. Judges don't determine what cases are brought into court by plaintiffs. So, your whole rebuttal is not only wrong, but irrelevant.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post


                          The political leanings of the courts is irrelevant to the political leanings of the ACLU. I pointed out that the ACLU has selectively taken cases with a bias to the Left. That has nothing to do with the bias of the courts. Judges don't determine what cases are brought into court by plaintiffs. So, your whole rebuttal is not only wrong, but irrelevant.


                          You do not understand my point which is that if we use your standards to evaluate the partisanship of institutions, then we have to conclude that the SCOTUS in the last 60 years was left leaning since they mostly voted for issues that you find part of the leftist agenda. This is obviously wrong since the SCOTUS has had a republican majority all these years. Therefore, your metrics are flawed

                          My most dangerous mission: I landed in the middle of an enemy tank battalion and I immediately, started spraying bullets killing everybody around me having fun up until my computer froze...

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
                            ...
                            Judges don't determine what cases are brought into court by plaintiffs. So, your whole rebuttal is not only wrong, but irrelevant.




                            And something else. Judges at the SCOTUS most often WILL DETERMINE what cases are brought into court by plaintiffs!

                            http://www.uscourts.gov/about-federa...rces/supreme-1

                            Supreme Court Procedures





                            Writs of Certiorari


                            Parties who are not satisfied with the decision of a lower court must petition the U.S. Supreme Court to hear their case. The primary means to petition the court for review is to ask it to grant a writ of certiorari. This is a request that the Supreme Court order a lower court to send up the record of the case for review. The Court usually is not under any obligation to hear these cases, and it usually only does so if the case could have national significance, might harmonize conflicting decisions in the federal Circuit courts, and/or could have precedential value. In fact, the Court accepts 100-150 of the more than 7,000 cases that it is asked to review each year
                            Last edited by pamak; 08 Oct 18, 18:16.
                            My most dangerous mission: I landed in the middle of an enemy tank battalion and I immediately, started spraying bullets killing everybody around me having fun up until my computer froze...

                            Comment

                            Latest Topics

                            Collapse

                            Working...
                            X