If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Guardian)   U.S. edging toward dictatorship, says former Supreme Court judge Sandra Day O'Verreaction   (guardian.co.uk) divider line 588
    More: Interesting  
•       •       •

18025 clicks; posted to Main » on 13 Mar 2006 at 8:35 AM (8 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



588 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | » | Last | Show all
 
2006-03-13 12:40:00 AM
Wish she had stayed.

Hopefully she is wrong about this, but I fear she is dead on.

W has definitely destroyed a lot of freedoms, and is trying like crazy to drag us into Fascism.
 
2006-03-13 12:46:31 AM
Fascism happens when business controls government.

We're already there.
 
2006-03-13 12:50:51 AM
bloobeary: Fascism happens when business controls government.

Fascism happens when people who are fascists are in charge. How about that.
 
2006-03-13 07:24:33 AM
I knew the Clintons like the White House, but damn, so soon?
 
2006-03-13 08:38:06 AM
She's right on this point. I disagree with her jurisprudence overall -- too many slippery "balancing tests" -- but this administration is taking us there.

And I can say that because I'm a Republican.
 
2006-03-13 08:38:31 AM
says, with an 's'.

Agreement of number and all...


/grammar whore
 
2006-03-13 08:39:12 AM
The GOP hates the judicial branch because there isn't a guarantee that every judge will vote according to the GOP dictates.

Thus, the harsh language against judges, setting the stage for intimidation and violence.
 
2006-03-13 08:40:13 AM
She should know, she helped install the present Dictator Wannabe and if she was really so concerned about it she should have stayed put on SCOTUS. The appointment is for life.
 
2006-03-13 08:42:44 AM
Then why the fark did she retire? Does not compute.
 
2006-03-13 08:43:08 AM
img.fark.com
 
2006-03-13 08:43:27 AM
So Bush is going to disband Congress and SCOTUS, and cancel all future elections? Neato.

/I would have thought she'd know what that word means.
 
2006-03-13 08:43:42 AM
hehe, obvious trumps interesting

/just sayin
 
2006-03-13 08:43:42 AM
www.80sreborn.com

Women should stay home and make babies. Preferably, manchild.
 
2006-03-13 08:43:44 AM
I can't think of anything more dictatorial than a Supreme Court justice...

--Position for life...
--Can overrule Presidential/Congressional laws if they deem it unconstitutional
--Can overrule prior court decisions if they so deem it. So much for stare decisis.
--Decide what cases they want to hear and can refer cases to them back to lower courts. Who do these people answer to anyways?

FARK Sandra Day O'Conner! She surely is opinionated about the current government now that she is getting paid on the speech circut.
 
2006-03-13 08:43:45 AM
Now, other than a coup.

How would someone instate a Dictatorship?

If your platform to be elected is that once elected you'll turn it into a dictatorship and do what you want...would that fly?

Like if people actually vote for you and you win...what then?

/kinda off topic, but not really.
 
2006-03-13 08:43:58 AM
And the American people are just fine with that because a dictatorship will be more suited to protect us from the turrists. And the Jedi.
 
2006-03-13 08:43:59 AM
*sigh* We're all farked. Good thing we have the most weapons per capita than any other country in the world.

Point? None.
 
2006-03-13 08:44:33 AM
The tinfoil is on tight today...

Geez.

Do we get to point and laugh at all the kooky motherf*ckers when Bush, in fact, doesn't run for office in 2008?
 
2006-03-13 08:45:49 AM
Hmmmm, is she saying that people should not be permitted to speak out against the judiciary? That sword cuts both ways.

I don't think any judge has been impeached based on a single decision, or even a life-time of decisions. If so, please, someone provide information. Because it SCOTUS, and other posts are for life, she needs to decide if it is OK for someone, elected official or otherwise, to speak freely about a courts decision.
 
2006-03-13 08:46:42 AM
Well, we already live in a police state. Dictatorship can't be that far off.
 
2006-03-13 08:47:04 AM
arizona.indymedia.org
 
2006-03-13 08:48:10 AM
To godwin the thread...

At least Hitler was legally elected.
 
2006-03-13 08:48:34 AM
Espertron: -Can overrule Presidential/Congressional laws if they deem it unconstitutional

Congress can change the Constitution.

--Can overrule prior court decisions if they so deem it. So much for stare decisis.

Congress can overrule previous laws with new ones.

--Decide what cases they want to hear and can refer cases to them back to lower courts. Who do these people answer to anyways?

The Constitution, which means Congress and the states (for ratification).
 
2006-03-13 08:48:43 AM
She's definately trying, isn't she? Perhaps the people would like to be free from judges abusing the judiciary branch to advance their personal agenda?

Please, tell me, people: What freedoms have you lost in the past 6 years? I read these threads and people will cry about how individual freedoms are being shiatcanned by the current administration, but no one can ever say what freedoms they have personally lost.

Threadjack, but are there any takers?
 
2006-03-13 08:49:25 AM
BaconatedGrapefruit: So Bush is going to disband Congress and SCOTUS, and cancel all future elections? Neato.

/I would have thought she'd know what that word means.


It means something other than what you apparently think it does. You can dictate and hold elections. You can dictate and have a congress of representatives. You can dictate and have a judicial body.

In the future, rather than picking a small subset of a set, why not examine the set as a whole, that way, when somebody like me comes along and says "hold up thar", your lunacy might hold a little more water.
 
2006-03-13 08:50:02 AM
Airrik99: How would someone instate a Dictatorship?

If your platform to be elected is that once elected you'll turn it into a dictatorship and do what you want...would that fly?

Like if people actually vote for you and you win...what then?


Same way the Nazis did it. Hitler rose to power by election, not by force. If people vote for it, there's obviously enough desire for it. The ones that don't agree will probably do nothing, as long as the people are fed, fat and happy, they'll let the government do whatever it wants.
 
2006-03-13 08:50:26 AM
UNAMURRICAN!1111
 
2006-03-13 08:51:07 AM
Munchausen's Proxy: I don't think any judge has been impeached based on a single decision, or even a life-time of decisions. If so, please, someone provide information. Because it SCOTUS, and other posts are for life, she needs to decide if it is OK for someone, elected official or otherwise, to speak freely about a courts decision.

There's a HUGE difference between disagreeing about a court's decision and trying to gain national support for a power grab against the Supreme Court. Also, there's a HUGE difference between her saying it's inappropriate and requesting laws be in place that restrict speech. Get off the podium, geez.
 
2006-03-13 08:51:17 AM
I am so sick of all the Bushiates who can't defend what Georgie does so they just attack as paranoid everyone who sees a problem with the direction our country is headed. Fark you, you little fascist groupies.
 
2006-03-13 08:52:17 AM
$2TacoBill - I read these threads and people will cry about how individual freedoms are being shiatcanned by the current administration, but no one can ever say what freedoms they have personally lost.

In 2000, I remember the majority of the nation voting for Al Gore and that freedom, the freedom to chose your President, was taken from us and was replaced by someone the majority didn't choose.

And we've been paying the price ever since.
 
2006-03-13 08:52:23 AM

I can see the conservatives are taking the high road on this one.


She was as conservative as George Clooney. Easy to call her a conservaive since reagan appointed her, but she was pretty far left.
 
2006-03-13 08:52:31 AM
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

There you go $2TacoBill. I lost this freedom, you lost this freedom, and so did every other american.

Freedoms are like being pregnant; you can't just go part of the way. Either you grant everyone rights or they're not rights at all.
 
2006-03-13 08:52:36 AM
Dr. Mojo your lunacy might hold a little more water.

Don't speak of lunacy when you're discussing the possibilities of a fascist dictatorship United States just because the dude in the WH is someone you don't agree with.

We're a far cry from dictatorship and anybody that says otherwise has their panties tied in knots.
 
2006-03-13 08:52:47 AM
$2TacoBill: Please, tell me, people: What freedoms have you lost in the past 6 years? I read these threads and people will cry about how individual freedoms are being shiatcanned by the current administration, but no one can ever say what freedoms they have personally lost.

I have lost the right of freedom against search and seizure without a warrant. That's in the top ten of Constitutional freedoms. I've also lost quite a bit of free speech rights with respect to 'free speech zones.' (Yes, the dems had them too)
 
2006-03-13 08:53:54 AM
Espertron: In 2000, I remember the majority of the nation voting for Al Gore and that freedom, the freedom to chose your President, was taken from us and was replaced by someone the majority didn't choose.

You never had that freedom. Your ignorance of the laws of the republic don't change that.
 
2006-03-13 08:53:57 AM
Dr. Mojo PhD: In the future, rather than picking a small subset of a set, why not examine the set as a whole, that way, when somebody like me comes along and says "hold up thar", your lunacy might hold a little more water.

Source for that claim (definition of dictatorship that doesn't fit us currently and doesn't fit my definition, and is widely accepted)?

/or do you just enjoy thinking you're smart?
 
2006-03-13 08:54:39 AM
Overreaction? I don't think so. I think the overreaction was when a certain Republican notable complained about the courts being "out of control" (read: independent) & suggested it was time to correct that problem.
 
2006-03-13 08:55:03 AM
$2TacoBill: Please, tell me, people: What freedoms have you lost in the past 6 years? I read these threads and people will cry about how individual freedoms are being shiatcanned by the current administration, but no one can ever say what freedoms they have personally lost.


*I* personally, well i'm too small and quiet on the totem pole for the government to come after me, but i'm pretty sure people who have protested or been vocal have had their rights diminished. The people who protest and are locked up for bogus charges, the people who may have been under suspicion and were wiretapped without search warrents. It doesn't make you scared when the President of the United States defies things in the Bill of Rights but says it's ok since we're at war? You personally may not have lost any direct freedoms, but God help you if you *choose* to speak out against the administration.
 
2006-03-13 08:55:07 AM
I wonder what americans would think if another country did what the US did regarding Iraq? War Criminals or not? Really makes you wonder.

If the original premise for war has been proved null and void then they should receive a failing grade for their efforts and be made accountable... or no?

/who am I kidding
//its only tens of thousands of Iraqi's
 
2006-03-13 08:55:33 AM
For evidence of this drive to dictatorship, you just need to visit today's Fark politics page.

In summary, GOP congressman wants to pass a law that would retroactively make Bush's NSA spying legal and make it illegal to report abuses.

That is the danger that Sandra Day O'Connor is talking about.
 
2006-03-13 08:55:54 AM
$2TacoBill: Please, tell me, people: What freedoms have you lost in the past 6 years?

In every one of these threads, someone asks this as if he were the first to ask it and someone always answers and it never sticks. How about the freedom to not be held without trail or due process or the freedom to not be spied upon in every concievable way without a warrant or the freedom to not have your property seized by the government in the name of the public good? Those are the big ones. Read the Patriot Act for some set-ups for some more or listen to Bush's rantings for his wish list of scarier ones.
 
2006-03-13 08:55:59 AM
Maybe if the judiciary needed to be re-elected every 4 years, or whatever, then people wouldn't feel the need to act violently against judges who, appointed for life, view themselves as mini-deities.

Anyone who is a public servant above a certain grade (not talking about park rangers, but say from city managers on up) needs to be an ELECTED official. I think that that would clear up a lot of this.

/Lives in MA
//Judge Maria Lopez
///nuff said
 
2006-03-13 08:56:44 AM
Espertron: In 2000, I remember the majority of the nation voting for Al Gore and that freedom, the freedom to chose your President, was taken from us and was replaced by someone the majority didn't choose.

Suddenly I'm glad my state requires all high school students to pass a US government class. People in other states end up as ignorant as you.
 
2006-03-13 08:56:59 AM
Its official

The left has completely gone off into fantasyland.

When GW isn't on the ballot in 08 it will be a Karl Rove scheme to trick people! Maybe Diebold will have those voting machines listed Bush an option!

Sponsored Link Alert

This link brought to you by the DU bring out the Farkers PAC
 
2006-03-13 08:57:09 AM
Espertron: I can't think of anything more dictatorial than a Supreme Court justice...

--Position for life...
--Can overrule Presidential/Congressional laws if they deem it unconstitutional
--Can overrule prior court decisions if they so deem it. So much for stare decisis.
--Decide what cases they want to hear and can refer cases to them back to lower courts. Who do these people answer to anyways?


I'm sorry that you don't like the Constitution of the United States. Please move to a country with ideals and principles more in line with your beleifs, if you don't already live in such a place.
 
2006-03-13 08:57:30 AM
BaconatedGrapefruit

So Bush is going to disband Congress and SCOTUS, and cancel all future elections? Neato.

Iraq under Saddam Hussein had a legislative body, courts, and elections.

/I would have thought she'd know what that word means.

/I would have thought that someone who just discovered that his understanding of a simple political term conflicts with that of a former Supreme Court Justice of the United States of America might put a little more thought into it than simply jumping to the immediate conclusion that the former Supreme Court Justice of the United States is the one who is wrong about it.
 
2006-03-13 08:57:34 AM
$2TacoBill: Please, tell me, people: What freedoms have you lost in the past 6 years? I read these threads and people will cry about how individual freedoms are being shiatcanned by the current administration, but no one can ever say what freedoms they have personally lost.

apparently, according to half the folks on fark, we lived in a locked-down police state, with bush personally monitoring the cameras in our living rooms.

bush this and that, and so on, but little has changed from the last pres to this one. you are all a bunch of complainy-pants.

the patriot act, which must clearly be one of the signs of the apocalypse from what i read here all day, does NOT in anyway affect me. and probably very little of the rest of you. bah. a little extra time spent in line at the airport isnt pissing me off--i would rather they check for bombs and weapons than not, after all.
 
2006-03-13 08:58:06 AM
Mugato: How about the freedom to not be held without trail or due process or the freedom to not be spied upon in every concievable way without a warrant or the freedom to not have your property seized by the government in the name of the public good?

That all happened to you? How awful.
 
2006-03-13 08:58:16 AM
lease, tell me, people: What freedoms have you lost in the past 6 years?

I cannot walk down a public sidewalk after midnight without a cop stopping me to ask me where I'm going and to produce identification.
 
2006-03-13 08:58:24 AM
Previous post was response to Observatory's photo of bush behind bars... not trolling
 
Displayed 50 of 588 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report