Moveon.org attempts to use Katrina disaster to take on nominee Roberts for supreme court.

Originally posted by junglejake
So that justifies using the horrible loss of a multitude of people to promote your political agenda?

THERE WAS NO AD, people! You're arguing over nothing! See the update in the article!

And no, it's not justified. It's not justified on either side.

www.newsmax.com...

John Roberts Helped in Gay Rights Case

Supreme Court nominee John Roberts donated his time to work behind the scenes for gay rights activists – and helped win a decision that's been hailed as the "single most important positive ruling" for the gay rights movement.

Roberts was a lawyer specializing in appellate work in 1995 when he agreed to help represent the gay rights activists as part of his law firm's pro bono work.

He did not argue the case before the Supreme Court, but he was instrumental in reviewing filings and preparing oral arguments, according to a report in the Los Angeles Times.
"Roberts' work on behalf of gay rights activists, whose cause is anathema to many conservatives, appears to illustrate his allegiance to the credo of the legal profession: to zealously represent the interests of the client, whoever it might be," the newspaper reports.

Walter A. Smith, then head of the pro bono department at Roberts' law firm, Hogan & Hartson, asked for Roberts' help on the case and he agreed immediately. "It's illustrative of his open-mindedness, his fair-mindedness," said Smith. "He did a brilliant job."

The case before the Supreme Court, Romer vs. Evans, dealt with a voter-approved 1992 Colorado initiative that would have allowed employers and landlords to exclude gays from jobs and housing.

A 6-3 ruling striking down the initiative was handed down in May 1996.

Jean Dubofsky, lead lawyer for the gay rights activists, said Roberts' work in the case was "absolutely crucial."

www.nationalreview.com...

Before examining how Roberts’s advocacy interest fared in such cases consider for a moment all of the hurdles an advocate must clear before even getting to make an argument before the Court. Of the tens of thousands of cases litigated annually in the lower courts, the Supreme Court reviews only about 100-120 a year. By the time the arguments advance to the Supreme Court they’ve gone through a torturous gauntlet of legal analyses. Most arguments that survive to be heard before the Court are taut and tempered. Yet 50 percent of these arguments must necessarily fail, regardless of how lucid, cogent or substantive they may be. Probabilities would suggest, therefore, that even if Roberts somehow slipped past the gatekeepers and got to make truly extremist civil rights arguments before the Court, it would reject virtually 100 percent of them, or at bare minimum, far more than 50 percent. Otherwise, the Court also would have to be labeled as out of the mainstream.

Roberts’s opponents should be stunned, then, to learn that the Court agreed with Roberts’s “extremist” civil rights positions 70 percent of the time.

The immediate reaction of some Roberts opponents might be to contend that this high percentage is inflated by the presence and influence of conservatives (read “fellow extremists”) on the Court such as Scalia and Thomas. But of the 13 justices before whom Roberts has argued 11 have agreed with his advocacy interest more than 50 percent of the time.

To be sure, of the current Supreme Court justices, those that agreed most often with Roberts’s advocacy interests were Rehnquist (74 percent of the time) Scalia (70 percent) Kennedy (70 percent) and Thomas (69 percent). Yet even liberals such as Ginsburg (60 percent) Stevens (57 percent) and Souter (57 percent) agreed with Roberts more than 50 percent of the time. (Note that not all of Roberts’s arguments in a given case were precisely adopted within the rationales of respective justice’s opinions. Nonetheless, the justices at the very least concurred with his general advocacy interest in the foregoing percentages.)

Organizations such as the NAACP, which last week declared that recently revealed documents indicate Roberts has “a longstanding hostility towards core NAACP civil rights priorities,” clearly must not be aware of the foregoing. Nor must they be aware of one additional fact: Thurgood Marshall, former chief counsel for the NAACP, lion of civil rights litigation and hero of Brown v. Board of Education, Sweatt v. Painter and Murray v. Pearson agreed with Roberts’s advocacy position 67 percent of the time — nearly the same as Scalia and Thomas and more than O’Connor, the justice who upon her retirement was praised as “moderate” by many of those now opposing Roberts.

Unless Roberts’s opponents are prepared to call Thurgood Marshall a civil-rights extremist they need to acknowledge that Roberts’s advocacy positions, as well as his judicial decisions are squarely within the mainstream.

here is somthing i agree with this guy. Roberts is more like following the law than about him against gay rights or minorities. even liberals in Supreme court somtimes agree with him.

why do you think the Democrats have a hard time taking him on wen people say he is so extreme right, or right wing monster. its more like he follows how the law goes. even Democrats hire him for some cases.

This takes care of the women and the gays...both groups who are granted by the ignorance of the public a free pass to play on the basis of sex and sexual orientation. The public in this case being required to stand pat and let them play through ..by guilt ..and default.

Edit: I made a mistake here and deleted a large portion of your reply - The member most of your comments were directed to has seen it and replied however, so I hope too much harm has not been done...

Again, my appologies...

[edit on 9/12/2005 by EnronOutrunHomerun]

orangetom1999

Very nice post or that is what you think judging my character and my motives I too has seen how many like you eventually open your eyes to reality, but I have to burst your bubble a littler bit early, your post just shows to me how compliant and self confident the Moral majority is in this country.

This country belongs to everybody not only the few and the elite while the rest is been step on and use for political gain and to get votes.

It's something that you seem not to see on my previous post I refuse to become a poppet of ignorance, religious and political game.

The brainwashing in this country to accept the role of everybody as given by political and religious movements as the norm has gotten to you while many are waking up others refuse to leave their comfort.

I will keep my stance and my views and I will change accordingly as I see fit, and as now the problems in our nations that has to do with discrimination, favoritism and class gap and gender gap is more evidence than ever.

If you want to keep your head bury in the sand still dream of a US nirvana that is up to you.

But people like me has to wake up evey morning to smell the rotten truth that surround our politicians and many religious groups that think the government should be run like a theocracy.

Dream my friend dream well, at least is people like me that can see beyond the bubble. You will get your wish and Mr. Roberts will become the "Chief Justice" and then we will have more to talk about.

Because is not over yet, the reconstruction of American is just starting let see who wins in the end.

BTW I am honor that you pay attention to my posts.

marg.

Orangetom
This takes care of the women and the gays...both groups who are granted by the ignorance of the public a free pass to play on the basis of sex and sexual orientation. The public in this case being required to stand pat and let them play through ..by guilt ..and default.

I'd hardly call it a "free pass" considering they're still publicly persecuted for their beliefs and "shortcomings", as the bigots see things...When you're part of a repressed sub-culture or minority, certain things that should be available to everyone are severely diminished....Thus the need for civil rights...

That's simply the way we human beings operate in a society and culture like that of our own...

I am not aware that sex and sexual orientation or race is a civil right??? Please show me where it is a civil right and a pass to play through in the manner that the political machine in this country tries to use or misue it???

This is the arena where it is insulting to me and many Americans who can think outside the box.

Neither of you disputed the points I made about this device being used as a control device emotionally for votes.

Furthermore I do not dream of a nirvana... My view of events in this nation is chaos or "Ordo ob chao" Order from chaos. Chaos carefully cultivated for political reasons. This is not a new doctrine but goes back centurys. I dont agree with this view..I just know that this is what is happening.
Another version of it is "Deus Meumque Juis" god is my right..or justification..what I want is god. I did not say that I agree with this view ...I just know that this is what is happening. This is the "restoration of the true brotherhood."
It is the height of intelligent natural man..doing what he does best.

Originally posted by orangetom1999
I am not aware that sex and sexual orientation or race is a civil right??? Please show me where it is a civil right and a pass to play through in the manner that the political machine in this country tries to use or misue it???

Of course they're not civil rights, but my point is that "the powers that be" use their social/biological variations as a form of impeding upon their civil rights...

before I must make haste to shove off...I dont think this country belongs to the elite. No way..I am aware of the history of "Feudal Nations" and what it brings to the people.
I never made such as statement and never will. I do however think that this nation should not lower itself to the Lowests common denominator in conduct. Sex ,Sexual orientation, and race definitions are among the lowest common denominators used by politicians to get votes for thier respective partys. Often used to divide and conquer. This is what I mean when I say this "Victimization " is getting olde. It is last years song. Like someone still singing "Vietnam era songs." The manner in which it is used in the body politic is not much different from what the Roman politicians did complete with deficits to yeild votes and control over the public.
Always divide the public along some issue and keep political power entrenched. Some would call this Hegelian Dialectic.

Thanks ,
Orangetom

I find it odd that so many are against Roberts. Personally I don't really have a position on him yet, but from most of what I've seen, he seems ok.

Roe vs. Wade should be overturned in my view, and last time I checked it's never been close to unanimous, so that "set in stone right" isn't so much of one, but rather an allowance.

Hate crimes need to go in my opinion. They are fundamentally unequal in a country that prizes justice. It should be no longer ok to have racially gender biased laws on the books no matter who they favor.

Which leads me to Affermative Action. I think it's done it's job. It's up to the people now, and no one is really keeping anyone down but the Government through economic hardships like our insane taxes and wasted social programs (which don't particurally know race from my experience) and themselves.


Give the power to the people and they will take it. I personally recommend it.

Nobody said that they were, sex is matter of gender and sexual orientation is a matter of choice.

Regardless of how much negativity is given by the "appropriate groups" that are for or against is.

This is the arena where it is insulting to me and many Americans who can think outside the box.

Why?

Neither of you disputed the points I made about this device being used as a control device emotionally for votes.

You know what I actually agree with you on that one, that is been used by everybody from politicians to religious groups to interest groups to divert voters from real issues.

Abortion, men getting married with each other has been manipulated over and over by anybody that has something to gain from it.

Taking in consideration that Abortion is a women Issue. . . it is a gender issue also.

Furthermore I do not dream of a nirvana... My view of events in this nation is chaos or "Ordo ob chao" Order from chaos. Chaos carefully cultivated for political reasons. This is not a new doctrine but goes back centurys. I dont agree with this view..I just know that this is what is happening.

My apologies on that one because i agree with your statement so I guess I miss understood some of the original post.

"restoration of the true brotherhood."
It is the height of intelligent natural man..doing what he does best.

I don't really understand that last statement but I am just going to say that when men considered themselves above other men or women is always the change for discrimination and oppression of the ones that do not believe in your views.

The meaning of Brotherhood can be taken with various definitions.




[edit on 12-9-2005 by marg6043]

All I gotta say about this guy is that "he got devil eyes"

Originally posted by TrueLies

All I gotta say about this guy is that "he got devil eyes"

Actually I do get bad vibes from his persona, and I am very proud to say that I have a thing for been able to read people.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
THERE WAS NO AD, people! You're arguing over nothing! See the update in the article!

And no, it's not justified. It's not justified on either side.

Here's the update:
www.usatoday.com...

If members wish to discuss Roberts' nomination, there are other threads for that discussion. Or, a new original one might be started.
The update, IMHO, nullifies this thread, which has turned away from the moveon.org ad-to-be-or-not-to-be and turned into anothe Roberts fest.

Closed.