A Republican judge, appointed by Nixon, delivers the judgement that the Pledge of Allegiance is unconstitutional, as it mentions God. The aforesaid judge then withdraws the judgement, or postpones it (however that bit of legal chicanery is done, despondent sayeth not). Ultimately, it has no effect. Poof! Gone.
Except…
It starts a great hue and cry across the land. Pubbies set a land speed record getting to the floor to wrap themselves in patriotic bunting and deplore. The Dumbocrats waste no time, and begin shrieking “Me, too!” at the top of thier lungs.
(Extra point quiz: exactly how many minutes passed before the judgement was delivered and the first public condemnation thereof?)
This rather detracts attention from the plundering and rapine commited by White Guys in Suits. Well, Republicans, actually. Men who stand squarely behind the sacred value of Property. Just one of those odd coincidences.
Our Leader, of course, points out that this just emphasizes the need to get “common sense” jurisprudence onto our benches. By an astonishing coincidence, he has a whole list of potential candidates, all of whom have been vetted for possession of that very quality! Will wonders never cease!
I smell a rat! I smell a campaign theme, which has a curiously similar odor. I think they cooked up the whole brouhaha.
You really have to keep paying attention beyond just the headline, elucidator. The judge stayed the ruling so it will go to review instead of having to wait for the administration to decide if they’ll appeal the ruling.
Well, now, Monty exactly how does that contradict my thesis? I contend that the judge in question knew full well that his delivered judgement hadn’t a chance in hell. You may correct me on the legal mechanics of the act, all well and good. But what does that change?
The actual effect of the ruling is to markedly enhance Republican prospects by 1) putting a custom made campaign theme before the public eye with enormous fanfare and 2) distracting attention from Certain Embarrassments.
It could be a coincidence. It might also be the Hand of the Almighty altering circumstances to benefit His Chosen.
Also, the ruling would not have gone into effect for 45 days (IIRC) to allow for appeals anyways. Staying the ruling to allow for a review by the full panel had absolutely no effect.
[quote]
This rather detracts attention from the plundering and rapine commited by White Guys in Suits. Well, Republicans, actually.
[quote]
You’re a goddam moron if you think that all businessmen, or even all unethical businessmen are Republicans.
Actually, you’re a goddam moron either way, but that would be further evidence.
Just a minor point that it was two judges, not one, that issued the ruling, which you’ll probably take to mean that the conspiracy is just more wide-spread.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by waterj2 *
**Also, the ruling would not have gone into effect for 45 days (IIRC) to allow for appeals anyways. Staying the ruling to allow for a review by the full panel had absolutely no effect.
[quote]
This rather detracts attention from the plundering and rapine commited by White Guys in Suits. Well, Republicans, actually.
Now, now, be kind waterj2, ::gets tap on shoulder:: what…this is the Pit?..well, uh…okay, I guess kindness isn’t required. ::/tap on shoulder:: Never mind.
Actually, elucidator makes a good point. Whether or not this ruling wold have been reviewed anyway, and even if White Guys in Suits aren’t all Republicans (lots of other unethical businessmen wear suits), the Republicans do stand to make a lot of political hay from this debacle. Seems like a pretty astute observsation to me.
[hijack]And, please, please, puh-leeze, try not to write “anyways” when you mean “anyway.” :smack: It just makes you look as if you flunked sophomore English. [/hijack]
Holy hell, not another yahoo screaming “It’s just like Wag the Dog!” We had plenty of that foolishness towards Clinton and the trouble in Bosnia, thank you very much.
Well, quite my point. The judges who handed down this ruling knew that this ruling was a chimera. Think about it. Do you really believe it is plausible that the judges were handing down a judgement that they thought would have effect?
Of course not. They had to know that this was going nowhere but overuled, revoked, or constitutionally amended. I submit that might very well have been the whole rationale: to focus attention on an issue tailor made to enhance Republican stature, and draw attention away from Certain Indelicate Subjects.
Well,of course not. Tres Duh! But if you’ve got some time you might just want to consult one of those pages where they list campaign donations. Seems to be rather a pronounced leaning to the right, don’t you think? Or don’t you?
An unarguable point. Irrelevant. Ad Hominem. But unarguable.
Sure. I’m a moron, I drool in my oatmeal and think that GBush Jr. is Churchill reborn. I believe the millions of bucks pushed on to right wing candidates from the likes of Enron and WorldCom are nothing more than the expression of honorable and virtuous civic-mindedness. Naturally, it follows that such an honorable person is entitled by civic virtue, if not by divine right, to power and privilege a hundred times that accorded to the poor dumb schmuck who actually * makes* the stuff he sells.
Short bus all the way. Now, care to argue any actual points?
Oooooh, pithy rejoinder, M Green. I see you post from Dallas. Were you educated in Dallas as well? You take a rather Aggie approach to rhetoric and debate.
Handy guide: crackers, mostly Georgia Alabama, and Mississippi. peckerwoods, Texas, Louisiana, some New Mexico. Hillbillies are almost exclusively Arkansas, some Tennesee.
Rednecks, of course are all over the place. Urban cowboys who think Billy Ray Cyrus is country!?
Oh, and the horse upon which you rode, yellow-eyed pizzle-sucker!
Quod irae toro, cornum recidet, ya’ll
But seriously folks…
I ain’t kidding about this, though I’m way short of any kind legal case here. It’s the timing more than anything else.
For instance, does anybody know if this is the only such case extant? Is the timeline of the decision utterly normal?
Keeping in mind that I regard the court’s decision as exemplary, and expressing the highest of American principles… I can’t get away from the idea that the judges delivering this decision could not possibly fail to realize that thier judgement would have no legal effect whatsoever. Then why do it?
Who benefits?
Not the plaintiff. No relief has been rendered.
No the defendent. The decision has, technically, gone against them.
Not the judges, who look forward to being reveresed and ridiculed (in the politest possible terms) like you would look forward to having a pineapple slammed up your nixon.
To what end was this thing done, knowing full well that a great tumult would be created? Unless, of course, that tumult is the point.
Am I paranoid? Arguable. Suspicious? Yassir Ubetcha!
