Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell says American People Should "Have a Voice"

a reply to: Indigo5

Trump polls poorly outside of Republican circles.

Either likely Democrat Ticket beats him embarrassingly in current polls:

Real Clear Politics - 2016 Presidential Matchups

a reply to: dawnstar

*Sigh again* doing the job is correctly identifying what is lawful/unlawful and ruling upon it. This all being within the confines of the US legal system. Not international law, not what they "feel" and not what society has embraced.

a reply to: Gryphon66

And polls are never wrong, tailored or don't have people lie about who they are for?

originally posted by: macman
a reply to: Gryphon66

And polls are never wrong, tailored or don't have people lie about who they are for?

I haven't made those statements.

Care to address what I have said?

Anything I've said, like for example, pointing out the clear Constitutional basis for your only two examples of "legislating from the bench"?

I'm sure you were fine when Kim Davis "legislated from the County Clerk's Office" weren't you?

That doesn't strike you as hypocritical?

Judges in the United States are free to consult all manner of commentary," she said in a speech to several hundred lawyers and scholars here Friday.

She cited several instances when the logic of foreign courts had been applied to help untangle legal questions domestically, and of legislatures and courts abroad adopting United States law.

Fears about relying too heavily on world opinion "should not lead us to abandon the effort to learn what we can from the experience and good thinking foreign sources may convey," Justice Ginsburg told members of the American Society of International Law.

www.nytimes.com...

a reply to: macman

but isn't that what the conservative christians want to do, have judges that will refer to a age old book that originated in a far away land and use that as guidance as to how they rule?

On March 1, the Supreme Court ruled 5 to 4 that the Constitution forbids executing convicts who committed their crimes before turning 18. The majority opinion reasoned that the United States was increasingly out of step with the world by allowing minors to be executed, saying "the United States now stands alone in a world that has turned its face against the juvenile death penalty."

and we are now standing practically alone in the western world when it comes to torture....
she's right, just as we kind of look down on the arab lands for what we see as an inhumane legal system, how we behave ourselves will affect how people perceive us. and well we all now what happens to those far away lands that deviate from what we feel to be humane treatment, they get bombed to oblivion!!

no wonder I couldn't find anything, I was looking for where she was citing laws, and using them as if they were ours. she wasn't whe was just expressing her ideas, her beliefs... on a concept that didn't have anything really do do with placing the laws of other countries above our own.

and well, got to ask, do you really support sending 13 year old kids to death for their stupid mistakes??

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: macman
a reply to: Gryphon66

And polls are never wrong, tailored or don't have people lie about who they are for?

I haven't made those statements.

Care to address what I have said?

Anything I've said, like for example, pointing out the clear Constitutional basis for your only two examples of "legislating from the bench"?

I'm sure you were fine when Kim Davis "legislated from the County Clerk's Office" weren't you?

That doesn't strike you as hypocritical?

You tried to announce that Trump shall lose, because of.....wait....polls.

This guys asks if polls are never wrong, lies, etc.

Seems like a logical exchange.

You seem to have a lot of angst about anybody questioning your platitudes and pronouncements.

It IS allowed, you know ?

originally posted by: dawnstar

Judges in the United States are free to consult all manner of commentary," she said in a speech to several hundred lawyers and scholars here Friday.

She cited several instances when the logic of foreign courts had been applied to help untangle legal questions domestically, and of legislatures and courts abroad adopting United States law.

Fears about relying too heavily on world opinion "should not lead us to abandon the effort to learn what we can from the experience and good thinking foreign sources may convey," Justice Ginsburg told members of the American Society of International Law.

www.nytimes.com...

a reply to: macman

but isn't that what the conservative christians want to do, have judges that will refer to a age old book that originated in a far away land and use that as guidance as to how they rule?

On March 1, the Supreme Court ruled 5 to 4 that the Constitution forbids executing convicts who committed their crimes before turning 18. The majority opinion reasoned that the United States was increasingly out of step with the world by allowing minors to be executed, saying "the United States now stands alone in a world that has turned its face against the juvenile death penalty."

and we are now standing practically alone in the western world when it comes to torture....
she's right, just as we kind of look down on the arab lands for what we see as an inhumane legal system, how we behave ourselves will affect how people perceive us. and well we all now what happens to those far away lands that deviate from what we feel to be humane treatment, they get bombed to oblivion!!

no wonder I couldn't find anything, I was looking for where she was citing laws, and using them as if they were ours. she wasn't whe was just expressing her ideas, her beliefs... on a concept that didn't have anything really do do with placing the laws of other countries above our own.

and well, got to ask, do you really support sending 13 year old kids to death for their stupid mistakes??

The entire basis of US law is set forth in the US constitution. Not other countries' or world-wide entities' documents / systems.

To try and claim such is nothing short of anarchy. There's no logical or valid way to make the connections, only pure sophistry and wishful thinking.

Trying to legislate from the bible makes no sense either, and only crackpots suggest it.

Constitution. Period.

originally posted by: stevieray

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: macman
a reply to: Gryphon66

And polls are never wrong, tailored or don't have people lie about who they are for?

I haven't made those statements.

Care to address what I have said?

Anything I've said, like for example, pointing out the clear Constitutional basis for your only two examples of "legislating from the bench"?

I'm sure you were fine when Kim Davis "legislated from the County Clerk's Office" weren't you?

That doesn't strike you as hypocritical?

You tried to announce that Trump shall lose, because of.....wait....polls.

This guys asks if polls are never wrong, lies, etc.

Seems like a logical exchange.

You seem to have a lot of angst about anybody questioning your platitudes and pronouncements.

It IS allowed, you know ?

Well, are the reports of Mr. Trump's mad popularity also the result of polls? Some polls are okay when they say what you (generic you) like, but the others are bad?

I responded the question put to me, aptly and logically. I didn't make the statement they were claiming I did.

Just as I didn't make the statement you are claiming I made. /shrug

I offered the results of current polls. The polls show what I stated that they did in my summary.

Notice the word "current."

I didn't claim that anyone involved is a fortune-teller.

You seem to want to talk about your opinion of me rather than what I claim; that seems like a very weak argument on the matters at hand ...

at best.

a reply to: Gryphon66

That wasn't directed directly to you, just to the polls.

originally posted by: macman
a reply to: Gryphon66

That wasn't directed directly to you, just to the polls.

Ah, beg pardon then.

Since you addressed your post to me, it was hard to tell.

No, in the case of a general question, most polls are crap. LOL.

a reply to: dawnstar

At what point did I state activism is okay for one side, but not the other?

Judges are to rule on cases based on US law, hence the title Supreme Court of the United States.

a reply to: macman

okay, how does one rule just what is cruel and unusual punishment without looking at society as a whole at that point in time to see how they gauge it, how they "feel" about it, or how you "feel" about it. if the arab nations accepted the idea it was what their founding fathers deemed, well, they would be chopping off hands and using women's heads as target practice till the end of time!

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: stevieray

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: macman
a reply to: Gryphon66

And polls are never wrong, tailored or don't have people lie about who they are for?

I haven't made those statements.

Care to address what I have said?

Anything I've said, like for example, pointing out the clear Constitutional basis for your only two examples of "legislating from the bench"?

I'm sure you were fine when Kim Davis "legislated from the County Clerk's Office" weren't you?

That doesn't strike you as hypocritical?

You tried to announce that Trump shall lose, because of.....wait....polls.

This guys asks if polls are never wrong, lies, etc.

Seems like a logical exchange.

You seem to have a lot of angst about anybody questioning your platitudes and pronouncements.

It IS allowed, you know ?

Well, are the reports of Mr. Trump's mad popularity also the result of polls? Some polls are okay when they say what you (generic you) like, but the others are bad?

I responded the question put to me, aptly and logically. I didn't make the statement they were claiming I did.

Just as I didn't make the statement you are claiming I made. /shrug

I offered the results of current polls. The polls show what I stated that they did in my summary.

Notice the word "current."

I didn't claim that anyone involved is a fortune-teller.

You seem to want to talk about your opinion of me rather than what I claim; that seems like a very weak argument on the matters at hand ...

at best.

Didn't offer an opinion of you. Get over yourself.

It was your overindulgence in polls that you like, and your claim that questioning the quality of polls was off topic, or not related. Or something.

Trump is what Trump is, regardless of polls. I would suggest however that polls that give somebody 20 % or better leads, are not likely to be wrong.

Margin of error and all that.

a reply to: macman

they also have a duty to determining if those laws run contrary to the us constitution, or deprive a segment of the population their constitutional rights.

originally posted by: stevieray

Didn't offer an opinion of you. Get over yourself.

originally posted by: stevieray

You seem to have a lot of angst about anybody questioning your platitudes and pronouncements.

Is the estimation of my "angst" the topic?

Does the description of my posts as "platitudes and pronouncements" say anything about the topic?

/shrug
/ignore

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: macman

okay, how does one rule just what is cruel and unusual punishment without looking at society as a whole at that point in time to see how they gauge it, how they "feel" about it, or how you "feel" about it. if the arab nations accepted the idea it was what their founding fathers deemed, well, they would be chopping off hands and using women's heads as target practice till the end of time!

There is no world society.

There are countries. Each has language, alphabet, norms, and so on.

Thanks to colonial UK, Hitler, USSR, China, Yugoslavia, Iraq.....we've learned that you can't just grow and grow and grow, sucking up countries and cultures. The country is the biggest practical, functional unit.

The global one-world can't work, ever. Culturally either. If we waterboard individuals to stop them from killing scores or thousands, tough too bad.

If the only way that some backwater country can stop theft is by chopping off hands.....so be it.

Discrimination with no purpose, I'll agree with. ME treatment of women.....go ahead and raise a ruckus. Ditto slavery and racial violence.

But how we stop terrorism, murder, mayhem ? Don't care. Just get it done. Let the criers cry, then laugh at them.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: stevieray

Didn't offer an opinion of you. Get over yourself.

originally posted by: stevieray

You seem to have a lot of angst about anybody questioning your platitudes and pronouncements.

Is the estimation of my "angst" the topic?

Does the description of my posts as "platitudes and pronouncements" say anything about the topic?

/shrug
/ignore

My take on your methods and behaviors as you argue.

Don't know you, don't want to, have no knowledge or opinion of you as a person.

If we outlaw adjectives and synonyms that aren't flattering to us, this place will screech to a halt.

Seems to be what you're asking for, though.

a reply to: dawnstar

What happens within other countries is not what US judges are put in place to consider.
The writers of the laws are the ones that determine what is.

Judges are there to determine if what has happened in lower courts is Constitutional or not.

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: macman

they also have a duty to determining if those laws run contrary to the us constitution, or deprive a segment of the population their constitutional rights.

This is what US law / jurisprudence is all about.

Exactly where does the UN and eurozone and world court fit in, lol ?

a reply to: stevieray

and the point I was trying to make just flew well above your head I guess.....

some keep pointing to our founding fathers, claiming that we should interpret what they wrote as in their eyes, and deciding these cases according to how they would see things. well, I am just pointing out that if the arab countries hold that philosophy out, they will never change, and we would end up going backwards. what we feel is moral, and just, and even humane treatment, is not the same as it was when this country was founded, it's not even the same as it was a hundred hears ago.