2008 USP(G)ET pt. II: counting the days to 2012 primary thread 1

I knew Marbury v Madison because I paid attention! I attended a private Catholic high school, and there was no sense then, or later in college, that the Supreme Court was important. I've made it my personal mission to read about the history of SCOTUS this year but I'm far from an expert.

she was thinkin it tho xp

all of them u know what ever case are in front of me

SCOTUS is like the Holy Spirit of American education: you're told it exists, and it's important, but no details.

Plessy v. Ferguson is a personal favorite

To be fair, the question was "Which cases do you disagree with?"

exactly - what, did you think she was gonna cite Bush v. Gore? lolz

I doubt McCain could cite another ruling he disagreed with

she disagrees with Lochner v New York.

I knew Marbury v Madison because I paid attention.

Yeah--I guess I had a really good high school government teacher. I dunno.I'm not calling myself above average but I'm starting to realize my h.s. government teach was pretty awesome. but anyway, my point is, she should be able to discuss this sort of stuff.

To be fair, the question was "Which cases do you disagree with?" not just "Can you identify any other Supreme Court cases?" It's not like she's going to say "Brown v. Board of Education was bullshit."

Okay, yeah, sure. But her answer is totally laughable, which is fine with me b/c at this point, I am watching her for the LOLs

she's doesn't have to answer the question either--the question is basically Couric asking her to talk about SCOTUS, which she should be able to do.

she could've just said - I'm no legal scholar, I can't think of any offhand. and that would've been fine. Instead her answer is the usual mishmash of nonsense.

like i bet she could not name all 9

You guys are missing the point. Palin is here to appeal to the right-wing base, which LOVES to hear talk about "activist judges legislating from the bench." I haven't been paying close enough attention to know if Palin is on record as having made similar statements but I assume this is the universe in which this question operates. So not being able to name cases you disagree with isn't about being ignorant of current events, it's about not being able to identify the supposedly villainous acts you're campaigning to bring a stop to.

To be fair, the question was "Which cases do you disagree with?" not just "Can you identify any other Supreme Court cases?" It's not like she's going to say "Brown v. Board of Education was bullshit."

Disagreeing with Dred Scott v. Sanford shd be pretty safe these days.

hmm I'm not sure I could name all 9... let's see: Scalia, Kennedy, Bader-Ginsberg, Thomas, Souter, Roberts... uhhh okay I'm drawin a blank on the other 3

x-posts

Stevens

Breyer

Like, the base may or may not know the names of the cases, but they are ready to be excited by an answer like "Well obviously Lawrence v. Texas, where the court apparently decided that sexual preferences are fundamental rights" and stuff like that.

Alito

Scalia Jr

Like, the base may or may not know the names of the cases, but they are ready to be excited by an answer like "Well obviously Lawrence v. Texas, where the court apparently decided that sexual preferences are fundamental rights" and stuff like that.

exxxxxxxxxxxxactly

haha Shakey mentioned Scalia first.

well he's easily the most memorable/obnoxious

http://www.slowpokecomics.com/strips/scalia.gif

and he's Ginsberg's best friend on the Court!

yup--LOL elephants

http://www.oyez.org/tour/rbg-room/rbg_elephant/elephant.jpg

Bader-Ginsberg

she does not hyphenate her name

it's also Ginsburg

but who the fuck cares, this is the internet

going back to the palin's inability to name cases she disagrees with--she doesnt have to name them. she could state the issue and the holding and why she doesnt like it. thats what biden did i think

the

Couric: Do you think there's an inherent right to privacy in the Constitution?

Palin: I do. Yeah, I do.

hahaha, she can't please anybody on either side.

"it's penumbral" she did not add.

hahaha

Yeah for real, not buying a "phantom" right to privacy is the litmus test for "strict constructionist" stuff.

Have we discussed this yet? Her finances have been posted. On par with Joe Biden's, actually

Fun bits:

These figures do not include nearly $17,000 in per diem payments Palin received for 312 nights spent in her own home since she was elected governor;

And her husband won $10K in a snowmobile race

Couric: Do you think there's an inherent right to privacy in the Constitution?

Palin: I do. Yeah, I do.

loool

McCain makes a "dictator" non-joke joke: http://www.infowars.com/?p=5005

(apologies for the InfoWars link)

Contrasting and comparing their responses, Biden might not just keep from embarassing himself, but enamor himself further to a group of people who've had very little interaction with him. The only way you could say "better Palin than Biden" based solely on that clip is if you're pro-life or if you think abused women have too many rights.

"Aspires." xpost

The only way Palin could endear herself with undecided, wishy-washy libs is if Iffil askes her about her gay best friend.

“I don’t know what prayers are worthy of being prayed, and I don’t know what prayers are going to be answered, but as for homosexuality, I am not going to judge Americans and the decisions that they make in their adult personal lives....One of my absolute best friends for the past 30 years happens to be gay ... I love her dearly. She is not my gay friend -- she is one of my best friends. She happens to have made a choice that isn’t a choice that I would have made.”

Lots of wtf moments here, obviously.

^^ for starters that a gay woman would be in Alaska. Slim pickins amirite?

those fuckin' Eskimo and their nose rubbin'.

538 now has Obama winning 85% of models. state probabilities:
NM: 90
MI: 88
PA: 86
CO: 84
VA: 79
NH: 72
FL: 70
OH: 68
NV: 66
IN: 51
NC: 50
MO: 48
WV: 26
MT: 23
ND: 18

this guy xp

Biden might not just keep from embarassing himself, but enamor himself further to a group of people who've had very little interaction with him.

^^^ this. All those polls that showed Palin outperforming Biden last month seemed funny to me - Biden has barely been seen except for occasional gaffes and a few nice "attack dog" things. The debate is a great chance for him to do his whole schtick; if he doesn't lay it on TOO thick I think he can really pick up enthusiasm among the exact groups of people he was brought on board to appeal to. Thinking again of the comments re: Cafferty - THAT kind of guy.

i think this is otm. biden's responses to couric were reassuring to ppl wanting to see a guy who clearly was able to converse on the subjects at issue.

looking at the pew numbers re obama vs mccain in september, obamas biggest gains were in 50-65 y/o, $75k+ household income, "some college." i think a good biden performance would reinforce those gains.

btw is "in the tank" the new "thrown under the bus"?

no they mean two completely different things