Comments on: Who Will Replace Souter? 10 Known Knowns

Legal Analyst Andrew Cohen Pleads Ignorance But Shares Rules Of The Game, And Makes His Pick

[amer_icon]

"Could there be more of a lasting stink on the conservatives and Republicans than there is now? Are all the Cons anti-American or only the ones in Congress? "
------------------------
What exists now is more than adequate to keep me away from them permanently and aligned with the largest opposition party.

[noloyalisti]

Could there be more of a lasting stink on the conservatives and Republicans than there is now? Are all the Cons anti-American or only the ones in Congress?

[briannorwood]

Thus, we are talking semantics here. No, the Constitution does not protect and right to privacy. It doesnt need to! Why? Because the Federal government, outside of its specific, implied powers, cant mess with anything else. Period.
Posted by mortar29

----

Then can you explain Terry Schiavo?

[amer_icon]

Harriet Miers!

_____

Thank God she never made it!

--------------------

Yes, imagine the additional lasting stink on the shoulders of the republicans if Bush had prevailed pushing that thru.

[BeckieBest]

Hey...here is a great link. Shows the seething disrespect by the press for the GOP...and their unfailing love for the Messiah Obama.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_VAfJyzN3ak
Posted by mortar29 at 12:26 PM : May 4, 2009



If the GOP was in any way able to lead the country competently or honestly, they'd still be in power instead of eating sour grapes and blaming the press for their downfall.

The GOP will have to remake itself if it hopes to make a comeback.

As of yet they just keep moving further and further to the extreme right.

[excoachken]

Now, if Cheyney could only go duck hunting with Scuzzy Scalia a little more often..........................................................................................................................................

[amer_icon]

Well good luck mortar on your practice of political science. I'm comfortable believing it won't harm Obama nor help the Republicans.

[jroach31]

To a conservative, ALL searches are "reasonable", as long as it is someone else who is being searched. NO punishment is "cruel and unusual", as long as it's nobody they know. The only amendment to the constitution that they even acknowlege the existence of is the 2nd amendment--unless they've been called on to testify; then they remember there's a fifth amendment, too.

[briannorwood]

Well, he is correct. There is no right to privacy in the Constitution
--mortar29

---

Sorry, but I must sincerely disagree here. It is true the Constitution never mentions the word privacy, but privacy is clearly defined in Article IV as being "secure in there persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures..." How else could one define privacy?

I find it rather disturbing that the argument is whether or not the constitution implies a right to privacy. A "strict constructionalist" would say that since it is not concretely spelled out in black-and-white, it therefore does not exist.

Reasonable people will interpret Article IX to provide it. And, most--if not all--of us would expect our highest court to protect this right!

[Trust_me_]

Acorn