View Full Version : Here comes trouble...Justice O Conner retires...
FMJeff
07-01-2005, 10:20 AM
<p><a href="http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/07/01/resignation.supreme/index.html">http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/07/01/resignation.supreme/index.html</a></p><p>OOf...this is gonna get ugly...</p>
<center><img src="http://www.ronfez.net/imagestorage/fmjeff.gif">
<br>
It made my heart sing.
Doctor Manhattan
07-01-2005, 10:24 AM
<p><font color="#990000" size="2">Isn't that title misleading? She's retiring, not dead. </font></p><p><font color="#990000" size="2">Unless it's a joke that's over my head.</font></p>
<a href="http://www.xmradio.com"><img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=skw" border=0></a>
angrymissy
07-01-2005, 10:27 AM
<font size="7">CRAP</font>
<BR><img src="http://www.ronfez.net/imagestorage/tiggy.gif" width="300" height="100" border="1"><BR>
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." [ Theodore Roosevelt ]
FMJeff
07-01-2005, 10:32 AM
<font style="font-size: 9px" face="Verdana">quote: </font><p><font color="#990000" size="2">Isn't that title misleading? She's retiring, not dead. </font></p><p><font color="#990000" size="2">Unless it's a joke that's over my head.</font></p><a href="http://www.xmradio.com/"><img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=skw" border="0" /></a> my bad...changed topic...lol....was thinkign about two things at the same time<br />
<center><img src="http://www.ronfez.net/imagestorage/fmjeff.gif">
<br>
It made my heart sing.
Doctor Manhattan
07-01-2005, 11:24 AM
<font style="font-size: 9px" face="Verdana">quote:</font><font style="font-size: 9px" face="Verdana"> <blockquote dir="ltr" style="margin-right: 0px"><p> </p>was thinkign about two things at the same time<br /><p> </p>[/quote]</font>was thinkign about two things at the same timeWere you planning on having someone killed while posting it? <img src="http://www.ronfez.net/messageboard/tiny_mce/plugins/emotions/images/ohmy.gif" border="0" /><br />
<a href="http://www.xmradio.com"><img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=skw" border=0></a>
For the sake of my sanity, I'm not going to watch
any television news until the end of this and just hope sanity
prevails.<br />
http://img118.echo.cx/img118/1900/sig6nj.jpg
high fly
07-01-2005, 11:27 AM
<p>Yes, Jeff, it is going to get <em>VERY </em>ugly.</p><p> </p><p>Of course it will be about only one issue, and that is abortion.</p><p>Abortion is about the only conservative position the neocons haven't abandoned.</p><p> </p><p>The front runner has gotta be Attorney General Gonzales.</p><p>Bush is nothing if not loyal. He will stick by anyone once they're aboard, no matter how badly they screw up. </p><p>The Tee-Ball President owes Gonzales from waaaaaaaaaay back when Gonzales got him offa jury duty in a drug trial, where Dumbya could conceivably had to say under oath what illegal drugs he had done, if he ever got any for a friend, etc.</p><p>PLUS Gonzales appeals to the natural contempt for the law this administration has. It was Gonzales who told Bush he could ignore the law in areas like Constitutional guaruntees of basic rights to an attorney and search and seizure, the Uniform Code of Military Justice the U.N. Convention on Torture and Mistreatment of Prisoners and the Geneva Convention in the treatment of prisoners, etc.</p><p> </p><p> </p>
" and they ask me why I drink"
http://64.177.177.182/katylina/highflysig.jpg
Big ups to sex bomb baby Katylina (LHOOQ) for the sig!
<font color="Navy"><font size="2">If it's all about abortion, it won't be Gonzales.
He's not as pure as the Christian zealots would like. In fact, other
than his positions on torture, he's in the same category as O'Conner, a
moderate conservative, probably the most attractive candidate Democrats could
expect from Bush. Which is depressing in and of
itself.</font></font><br />
<img border="0" src="http://img118.echo.cx/img118/1900/sig6nj.jpg" />
<font color=black>This message was edited by HBox on 7-1-05 @ 3:40 PM</font>
DarkHippie
07-01-2005, 11:58 AM
If its about owing someone, bush better nominate Robert Novak for outing Valerie Plame
<IMG SRC=http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v124/Canofsoup15/Sigs/HippieRat.jpg>
<marquee> Finally on Myspace http://www.myspace.com/darkhippie Please love me </marquee>
high fly
07-01-2005, 12:16 PM
<p>HBox, I don't think O'Connor has been a "moderate conservative" at all.</p><p>Of course, Scalia would make Hitler look like a Marxist, but on the spectrum, she is waaaaaay to the right.</p><p>She sho ain't no Souter...</p>
" and they ask me why I drink"
http://64.177.177.182/katylina/highflysig.jpg
Big ups to sex bomb baby Katylina (LHOOQ) for the sig!
spoon
07-01-2005, 02:05 PM
<p>Oh man, they've been waiting for this one. If any of the above people get nominated, the shit will truly hit the fan. I nominate Judge Judy or Judge Reinhold.</p>
<img src="http://members.aol.com/dxixrxt/spoon2.jpg">
Get your balls out of your purse and step up to flavor!
With whale cancer!
F yeah!
Mike Teacher
07-01-2005, 02:09 PM
<p>Well, 'moderate censervative' or not she, I'd say was a bit of a disappointment for Reagen after he appointed her in terms of how she went with some decisions.</p><p>And agreed, it aint gonna happen with Gonzalez re: abortion issue</p><p> </p>
<IMG SRC="http://members.aol.com/miketeachr/esig">
spoon
07-01-2005, 02:20 PM
<p>I'm listening to Mark Levin on 770 and he stated that he "called it". He's acting as if he was the only one to know there would be two (one to come) resignations on the Supreme Court. Do people actually believe that he was the only one to foresee this? Or should I say is anyone actually surprised? And if so, the American public is really disappointing. Who the fuck didn't see this coming? Who isn't on top of the Renquist situation? I truly can't even listen to 770 any longer. I used to get angry at their political stand, but now they actually talk to you like a 5th grader and I'm bored of it. I'd like to rename the station "Redneck Old Lady's Club". And I assure you that my grandmother isn't a member. </p><p>*Levin just stated the Libs are destroying/attacking our rights as US citizens, not just the terrorists?! How so Mark? Bc we won't stand for just any nomination to the SC? Nice point you tard! Why am I listening!!!!!! AHHhhhhhhhhhhhhhh! </p>
<img src="http://members.aol.com/dxixrxt/spoon2.jpg">
Get your balls out of your purse and step up to flavor!
With whale cancer!
F yeah!
<p>This IS the battle. If Rehnquist reitres,
there's not much of a chance they could nominate and get passed someone
more extreme than him. Even if they do, there's not much room. It would
barely, if at all, move the court rightward.</p><p>Replacing O'Connor, on the other hand, with a Thomas/Scalia-type would cement this court as super-conservative for a long time.</p><p>And,
don't forget, John Paul Stevens is VERY old, in his 80s. It's very
possible he'll retire druing Bush's term. If his replacement is a
right-wing extremist.................</p>
http://img118.echo.cx/img118/1900/sig6nj.jpg
Bulldogcakes
07-01-2005, 06:20 PM
I'll take a wait and see approach. Dont forget some of the more
"Liberal" judges on the court were appointed by Republicans, going back
to Nixon. <br />
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v303/Kevin2700/cakescopy.jpg
My brand spankin new site Bully Baby (http://bulldogcakes.tripod.com/index.html)
Do Siamese twins have to file seperate tax returns? Or do they file jointly?
Tenbatsuzen
07-01-2005, 07:48 PM
<font style="font-size: 9px" face="Verdana">quote: </font>I'll take a wait and see approach. Dont forget some of the more "Liberal" judges on the court were appointed by Republicans, going back to Nixon. <br /><p><br /></p><h1>DING DING DING</h1><p> </p><p> </p><img src="http://img227.echo.cx/img227/2240/ollie11po.jpg" border="0" />
<font color=black>This message was edited by Tenbatsuzen on 7-1-05 @ 11:48 PM</font>
Yerdaddy
07-30-2005, 11:34 AM
<p>Every once in a while I remember to fall in love with The Onion again</p><p><strong>SUPREME COURT JUSTICES DEVOUR SANDRA DAY O'CONNOR IN ANCIENT RITUAL</strong><br /> <br />WASHINGTON, DC—The eight remaining justices of the Supreme Court met in chambers Monday to feast on the living flesh of retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, enacting an ancient tradition that began when the first chief justice of the Supreme Court retired and was summarily consumed in 1795.</p><p>Although the most important cannibalistic ceremony in American jurisprudence is closed to outsiders, some details of the ritual are inscribed within the High Court Scrolls. The scrolls, written in human blood and stored in the Justice Library Reading Room, have been studied by only a handful of legal scholars.</p><p>"Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist almost certainly consumed the greater part of O'Connor's brain and heart prior to the ritual feeding, in a rite believed to grant him the knowledge, wisdom, and courage of the devoured," said American University law professor Donald Hewett. "Any portions of O'Connor's brain and heart that Rehnquist refused would have been consumed by the remaining justices within minutes, as they chanted passages from her seminal opinions."</p><p>Hewett said the first woman appointed to the Supreme Court was gutted, strung up, and "drained into stone goblets from which her blood was sipped like wine."</p><p>"This quaffing of blood is traditionally accompanied by much singing and drumming," Hewett said.</p><p>If the ritual was performed in accordance with the court scrolls, O'Connor's body was then laid upon a traditional brass bier and borne up a five-story marble staircase to a consecrated inner sanctum, where clerks skewered the raw meat on wooden spits. Late into the evening, the Supreme Court justices feasted on the renowned federalist by torchlight. </p><p>"The ceremony is said to be quite moving," said Zachary Katz, editor of the Yale Law Review. "By consuming O'Connor's mortal body, the other justices seek a communion with her transcendent qualities—her respect for the discretion of the court, her pragmatism, and her refusal to commit to abstract legal principles."</p><p>O'Connor has been prepared for the ritual since January 2005, when Chief Justice Rehnquist sprinkled her desk with the ashes of a virgin law clerk and pronounced, "Receptum, receptum, receptum."</p><p>Tuesday evening, Rehnquist emerged from the 17-foot-tall, 13-ton bronze sliding doors of the Supreme Court building's west entrance and addressed those who had gathered in the oval pavilion.</p><p>"Hear us, Justice," said Rehnquist, wearing a necklace of human bones and an elaborate headdress adorned with yak horns. "In the abiding name of Jurisprudence we consumed her; in the eternal name of Law was she eaten; and as her flesh does become our flesh, so her wisdom shall become our wisdom, yea, through all time everlasting."</p><p>According to legal scholars, O'Connor's skin will be tanned and sewn into a ceremonial cloak, to be worn by the youngest justice, Clarence Thomas, as he lights the pyre upon which members of O'Connor's senior staff are burned alive.<br /></p>
<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=bonedaddy5">
Fuck it from behind.
vBulletin® v3.7.0, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.