Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
12 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
O’Connor: Maybe Supreme Court shouldn’t have taken Bush v. Gore (Original Post) UCmeNdc Apr 2013 OP
Ya think? charlyvi Apr 2013 #1
Took the words right out of my mouth! muntrv Apr 2013 #2
Totally Agree! nt avebury Apr 2013 #8
Ya think?? The Velveteen Ocelot Apr 2013 #3
I hope that plays on Sandra's mind for the rest of her miserable life...and may shraby Apr 2013 #4
13 years later? ElboRuum Apr 2013 #5
All that is true but it isn't the reason they should have stayed out of it tularetom Apr 2013 #6
So I can expect them to apologize for Bush v. Gore in... 2025? krispos42 Apr 2013 #7
hopefully by than the court will turn Progressive bigdarryl Apr 2013 #11
I guess it wasn't important enough --> quadrature Apr 2013 #9
Too late for what happened but this is also history and as such it begins lunatica Apr 2013 #10
*facepalm* sakabatou Apr 2013 #12

The Velveteen Ocelot

(115,543 posts)
3. Ya think??
Mon Apr 29, 2013, 08:35 PM
Apr 2013

Jeez, Sandy!

I couldn't believe it when they granted cert. in that case. OF COURSE they shouldn't have reviewed it!

shraby

(21,946 posts)
4. I hope that plays on Sandra's mind for the rest of her miserable life...and may
Mon Apr 29, 2013, 08:43 PM
Apr 2013

she live to be very very old. She and the rest of the supremes screwed over this country royally and with malice.

ElboRuum

(4,717 posts)
5. 13 years later?
Mon Apr 29, 2013, 08:51 PM
Apr 2013

8 years of economic destruction, expensive wars engaged under false pretense, and the decimation of our world image, all of which we are just really starting to dig our way out from and now she thinks maybe it was a bad idea to get involved with the election?

tularetom

(23,664 posts)
6. All that is true but it isn't the reason they should have stayed out of it
Mon Apr 29, 2013, 10:19 PM
Apr 2013

If bush had turned out to be even a minimally decent president instead of the biggest disaster that ever occupied the white house it still would have been unacceptable from a constitutional standpoint.

krispos42

(49,445 posts)
7. So I can expect them to apologize for Bush v. Gore in... 2025?
Mon Apr 29, 2013, 10:34 PM
Apr 2013

Well, that just makes it all better, doesn't it?


 

bigdarryl

(13,190 posts)
11. hopefully by than the court will turn Progressive
Tue Apr 30, 2013, 09:31 PM
Apr 2013

the only remaining one that will still be there is Roberts he's only in his 50's or maybe that ASS HOLE Alito

 

quadrature

(2,049 posts)
9. I guess it wasn't important enough -->
Tue Apr 30, 2013, 06:53 AM
Apr 2013

maybe the people that think that way should
stick to deciding contract disputes
and traffic tickets

lunatica

(53,410 posts)
10. Too late for what happened but this is also history and as such it begins
Tue Apr 30, 2013, 08:59 AM
Apr 2013

to address the Supreme Court's dereliction of duty to the Constitution and puts the ugly cattle brand of theft on the selection.

Bush may think history will be kind to him but it won't. It won't be kind to the Supreme Court either. The Bush so-called "Presidency" will stand out as an aberration just like the genocide of the American Indians and the McCathy Era and slavery. Sooner or later this country is going to face it's dark side. When that happens maybe we'll start growing up as a country and learn some humility.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»O’Connor: Maybe Supreme C...