tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27697009.post8770270917997247217..comments2024-02-29T03:21:35.007-08:00Comments on The Great Depression of 2006 : The Importance of the Supreme CourtJim in San Marcoshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09435296419912935381noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27697009.post-28833019794402955712020-11-06T20:22:15.386-08:002020-11-06T20:22:15.386-08:00Welcome back Rob in Nova Scotia
Your comment &quo...Welcome back Rob in Nova Scotia<br /><br />Your comment "all that is need is a few activist judges who can frame past laws to suit their agenda with added proviso that decisions are final"<br /><br />It kind of suggests that our system of government had been modified slowly to advance more socialistic agendas that short change the average voter. You can vote, but it changes nothing. Kind of sucks IMHOJim in San Marcoshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09435296419912935381noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27697009.post-51129581066026080442020-11-06T04:22:54.756-08:002020-11-06T04:22:54.756-08:00Hello again from Nova Scotia. It has been too sinc...Hello again from Nova Scotia. It has been too since I treaded here. Have to say that the just past election has has done screwed things up real good. Methinks it was by design to discredit who ever wins with the same shade. You bring up the SCOTUS in the midst of this which I find interesting. I think you are on track and over the target. <br /><br />The recent elevation of Coney-Barrett to top Court has fundamentally changed the balance of power in USA. Since entering the "tarpits" that place has become the over riding legislative branch where the real sausage is made. The Progressive movement has used that court as their most effective way to push their agenda. Why bother with writing laws when all that is need is a few activist judges who can frame past laws to suit their agenda with added proviso that decisions are final. Now that this train has been derailed they are having a hissy fit. They have shown and importantly have stated that they will stop at nothing to resume the order that they so long enjoyed. It is probably why they no qualms about perverting the electoral process. They have been doing it thru that un-elected body for over 50 years... <br /><br />We're a few years behind in Canada, on path being your folks have set, still it is a certainty that we will get to same place too... The backlash against the current Progressive Trudough regime is just now gaining steam... The current government's solution is to import 1.2 million immigrants, in the next 3 years, to preserve their order. It might work in the near term but judging how it is being accepted in our fly country right now it is guaranteed to tear the country on pretty much the same lines as down south.<br /><br />That being said and using a baseball analogy, it is early innings in The Show..<br /><br />There will be curve balls and foul balls ahead. Let's hope nobody out there gets hit with a pitch..<br /><br />Cheers and be well folks,<br /><br />RiNS<br /><br /><br /> Rob in Nova Scotianoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27697009.post-38107003964215842242020-10-12T14:23:32.487-07:002020-10-12T14:23:32.487-07:00Your Bill of Rights is based partly on the English...Your Bill of Rights is based partly on the English Bill of Rights of 1689. In that year the Scottish parliament passed a bill called the Claim of Right, which - in my view - contains a wonderful passage.<br /><br />"Wheras King James the Seventh ... Did ... Invade the fundamentall Constitution of this Kingdome And altered it from a legall limited monarchy to ane Arbitrary Despotick power ..."<br /><br />The question for the US is whether it is to remain a legal limited monarchy (with its elected monarch) or become an arbitrary despotic power. deariemenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27697009.post-69239008558452686382020-10-11T14:17:36.097-07:002020-10-11T14:17:36.097-07:00Hi dearieme
I agree. The problem we are facing n...Hi dearieme<br /><br />I agree. The problem we are facing now, is the attempt to bias the court to more liberal views, to make it a part of the liberal policies of the left.<br /><br />The Supreme court got into two tar pits when they ruled on abortion and health care. Neither one has merit to be defended by our constitution. The government has no right to make the decision of whether you buy health care or a new car. It shouldn't end up being my problem if you choose to buy the new car. The same with abortion; what you do to yourself is your choice. Nobody should be able to project their beliefs upon you and curtail your freedom.<br /><br />Our legal system embodies a lot of English common law, sandwich that with our Bill of Rights, and it should be smooth sailing. The key words are "should be."Jim in San Marcoshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09435296419912935381noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27697009.post-53389549652657689692020-10-11T09:05:03.054-07:002020-10-11T09:05:03.054-07:00"do we have a Supreme court that holds everyo..."do we have a Supreme court that holds everyone to the principles written in our Constitution?" <br /><br /> I don't think your constitution is an assembly of principles. It's a well thought out set of definitions of how the federal government is to be constituted and run, combined with specific instruction on what the government is not to do. I suppose you could argue that some rules are effectively principles, of which the greatest is the announcement that the Federal government shall have no powers save those explicitly granted to it by the constitution.<br /><br />To give an example: the constitution does not adopt the principle of separation of church and state. Rather it gives a proscription: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ..." This has the huge advantage of prohibiting something that can be easily recognised rather than insisting that some vague action be taken.<br /><br />(Not being a work of philosophy it doesn't define "church" or "religion" which seems pretty wise to me).<br /><br />I admire the effort that went into designing your constitution and its outcome, even though it hasn't stood up very well to the test of time. That just shows how hard it was to design the constitution.deariemenoreply@blogger.com