Predictions of the 2004 campaign!

[Sava]

Originally posted by skywalker


For doing what?

2000, election, received political favors from Bush after the election... and for passing a decision when he had a clear cut case of conflict of interest. (Scalia's son worked with the Bush campaign, and later received a cushy job, a reward to the dad for doing his 'job').

[Kuciwalker]

Is the Supreme Court allowed to make decisions without all of its members present, though?

Seems like it's a bunch of whining, as there is no possibility of doing anything.

[Odin]

The Bushes, Harris, Scalia, Rummy, Cheney, Wolfie, and Ashcroft should be burned at the stake!

Sky, I hate the EC because it is anti-democratic.

[Sava]

Originally posted by skywalker
Is the Supreme Court allowed to make decisions without all of its members present, though?

I'm not sure of the exact provisions, but ethics demand Justices not make decisions if there are conflicts of interests. But then again, the SCOTUS has more than a few members who are morally bankrupt individuals who I wouldn't trust presiding over a traffic court.

[Kuciwalker]

Yeah, but you can't just say "let's ignore the parts of the Constitution I don't like". Either support an amendment voiding it or quit whining.

Plus, do you hate the UN because it is anti-democratic?

[Odin]

Originally posted by Sava
2000, election, received political favors from Bush after the election... and for passing a decision when he had a clear cut case of conflict of interest. (Scalia's son worked with the Bush campaign, and later received a cushy job, a reward to the dad for doing his 'job').

BURN HIM!!!

[Kuciwalker]

Of couse, all of that is completely true and unbiased...

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by skywalker
Of couse, all of that is completely true and unbiased...

You wouldn't think Sava is biased, would you ?

[Odin]

Originally posted by skywalker
Yeah, but you can't just say "let's ignore the parts of the Constitution I don't like". Either support an amendment voiding it or quit whining.

I DO want an amendment you numb-nuts!

Plus, do you hate the UN because it is anti-democratic?

I want the UN replaced by a organization that only allows in democracies and is based on proportional representaion of population. QED

[Sava]

Originally posted by skywalker
Of couse, all of that is completely true and unbiased...

Actually it's true. Read a book, or do some internet research... keywords "election scalia bush". My bias is irrelevant because there's more than enough information. It's not like I'm writing an op-ed here.

"let's ignore the parts of the Constitution I don't like".

Many conservatives do. They love that 2nd Amendment and their open interpretation... but hate the 1st and the 4th. I don't mind if people have a certain interpretation of the Constitution, but keep it consistent.

[Kuciwalker]

I DO want an amendment you numb-nuts!

Ok. But don't just say ignore the Constitution.

I want the UN replaced by a organization that only allows in democracies and is based on proportional representaion of population. QED

btw, what does QED mean? I've never really been able to figure it out.

[Odin]

Originally posted by skywalker
[btw, what does QED mean? I've never really been able to figure it out.

Don't ask me!

[Kuciwalker]

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by skywalker
Is the Supreme Court allowed to make decisions without all of its members present, though?

They probably have rules on what constitute a quorum. They mostly tend to believe in the dignity of the court, and that it is not a partisan body, so they wouldn't do things like boycott the court in hope of stopping it from making a ruling.

[Kuciwalker]

I couldn't find a quorum in the Constitution (I didn't even see where it specified nine justices).