ABSOLUTE POWER IS ABSOULTELY WRONG!
by Buck Evinger
Absolute Power, posted by Mz. Flowers in My Hair, is absolutely wrong, Once again demonstrating the average liberal’s total disregard for facts, history and the truth.
Bush did indeed re-nominate 5 judicial candidates, and for good reason. Unfortunately that is where the accuracy of fact in Mz. Flowers argument ends. The people who “examined their record and found them to have”extreme views and impaired objectivity” were partisan democrats. Mz. Flowers either doesn’t know or doesn’t care to awknowledge that all of Bush’s current nominees being blocked from Senate vote have a.) Received the American Bar Associations highest rating. The ABA is not exactly a conservative group, now is it. All of these nominees have been approved by the judiciary committee. The only thing they are just waiting for is what every single judicial nominee has received prior to this 108th Congress. A straight yes, or no vote from the Senate. If any group has extreme views and impaired objectivity, it is Senate Democrats.
It is the Democrats who have gone to the extreme on judicial nominees. Just to set the record straight, here are the facts.
Republicans didn’t coin the phrase, Nuclear Option, that came from the Democrats in an effort to make Republican procedures seem extreme. A more accurate name would be “The Constitutional Option.”
Senate Democrats are the ones going nuclear, by filibustering and requiring a super-majority to approve a judicial nomination. Prior to this congress, that has never happened before. Now you might be under the impression that Democrats filibustring effort is nothing more than the practice of constitutional democracy as planned for by our founding fathers. You’d be wrong.
Cloture, or a 3/5ths majority of 60 votes required to end a filibuster, is not an ideal written into the constitutional by our founding fathers. It is a Senate rule that was created less than 30 years ago. In fact, about 10 years ago SENATE DEMOCRATS changed that very rule, dropping it from a 2/3rds majority vote (66) to the current 3/5ths. That effort was led by none other tha Sen. Robert Byrd (DEM. WV and former KKK member.) So much for tradition.
In the entire history of the United States, filibusters have NEVER been used to block a president’s judicial nominees. Mz. Flowers, do you really think these nominees have extreme views. Why not do some research on who these nominees actually are. Here is one example. Judge Janice Brown from the California Appeals court. The extreme mark against her is that she is supposedly against affirmative action and has a racial bias against blacks.
Here is her picture. 
. Funny, she doesn’t look like a racist.
Republicans and conservatives don’t want judges to do anything but judge. It is the responsibility of the legislative branch of government to make laws by a vote representative of the will of the people. Democrats want an activist judiciary that allows one person in a black robe, responding to a privately funded legal proceeding, to create law. It is the only way liberal ideas, which are not part of the mainstream, can become law. If most ideals held forth by the Democratic party were required to be put to a vote, they would never happen.
LAL - God Bless George Bush!
Suzanne Says: April 18th, 2005 at 6:54 pm
Oh Good Grief Buck
Have I not taught you anything yet?
Oh The title is not MZ it is -
General Suzanne Katz - USAF-SF
Yep, I is a young General.
Have you not been reading about what is going on in this country?
On the other hand, are you so in love with this government that you are blind to its quest for unlimited power?
Hey, I voted for President Bush, but I am also an American, and when I see my and your Constitution being scrambled like eggs, well, it is time to stand up and make sure that there is the Balance of Power in the government just as the Constitution so states there must be.
Can you disagree with that?
Can you honestly say that there is a balance of power in this present government and or that if they accomplish what they are trying to accomplish this present government will resemble a dictatorship? This is not even close to being funny.
Suzanne
Suzanne Says: April 18th, 2005 at 6:58 pm
Next comment My Dear
I am not a Liberal,
I am an American, I voted Republican, I have voted Republican for 80% of the time and the other Democrat. Do not lable me, I have no label.
You may only call me an American,
Or the Flowers in my Hair is also just fine
Best just call me Flowers
Want some more good stuff, I have alot of good things you might be interested in.
But my dear I am still waiting for that
Establishment Clause thing to be finished, you seem to think I have forgotten about that one.
Your Friend even though we disagree
Flowers
Suzanne Says: April 18th, 2005 at 7:00 pm
Oops!
Sorry,
but I think I need to stop speed reading as I miss too many of your silly comments
Racist! My Goodness, I did not say one thing about anyone being a racist, I would be the last person on earth to classify anyone by their race.
Use a better train of thought please, you are putting yourself down.
Suzanne
Suzanne Says: April 18th, 2005 at 7:11 pm
Absolute Power
Destroys not only America, but it also destroys
Leaders of Countries who are and have been the friends of America. This is so sad, this is terrible. This is unforgivable.
Suzanne
Suzanne Says: April 18th, 2005 at 7:14 pm
Last comment for today
God Pleas Bless America as America needs you more now than ever before
Suzanne
In reference to God, I am asking everyones God as everyones God no matter what He is called, He loves everyone.
Lefty Says: April 18th, 2005 at 11:27 pm
Buck has a point. Judge Brown is not a typical republican judicial nominee. She is actually quite reasonable.
Lefty Says: April 19th, 2005 at 2:20 am
Overall, the Senate has confirmed more than 200 Bush judicial nominations, including the confirmation on April 11 of district court nominee Paul Crotty by a vote of 95-0. If and when the Republicans allow a vote on [district court nominee J. Michael] Seabright, Bush will get his 206th judge. For all the talk of Democratic obstruction and the need for a ‘nuclear option [to end Democratic filibusters of judicial nominees],’ there must be hundreds more that the Democrats have blocked, right? Well, no. Two-hundred-and-five of Bush’s judicial nominees have been confirmed. The Democrats have blocked exactly 10 [by filibuster].
Stephen Says: April 20th, 2005 at 11:02 am
“Senate Democrats are the ones going nuclear, by filibustering and requiring a super-majority to approve a judicial nomination.”
Remember when Strom Thurmond read a phone book to block civil rights?
If the two ruling parties of American that have such similar ideologies can’t agree on judicial nominees, then President Bush should find some different nominees.
EMT907 Says: April 27th, 2005 at 1:53 pm
Perfect!
We have a person that posts liberal rantings, is obviously misled by the DNC and the kook liberals, claims over and over how she has voted for Bush/Republicans and states over and over again that she’s an American.
Yep. She’s a lib.
If only I had a dollar for everytime I’ve heard/read “I voted for Bush but…” and in so many different variations of the same.
Cody Says: April 27th, 2005 at 8:47 pm
Damn, can’t those liberals learn that supporting something doesn’t mean you’re free from enemy fire? Look at it this way: A Star Wars fan and another guy are in an argument about the realism of Star Wars compared to Star Trek. The Star Wars fan points out numerous errors in the other guy’s argument. The other guy says that he is a Star Wars fan, as if that will give him immunity to scorn from Star Wars fans. The moral: In a war, you can’t join the battle, then say you support the other side and shout “FRIENDLY FIRE” when you are targeted. It doesn’t work that way, Suzanne.
Elise Says: April 28th, 2005 at 1:38 am
guys, you are talking to the drama queen.
Elise Says: April 28th, 2005 at 1:45 pm
You guys are talking about a “Drama Queen”! Careful or she will unleash her wordy wrath on you.
Suzanne Says: April 30th, 2005 at 5:50 am
Number 9
Did you write a bad name about me?
Did you call me a (Oh My Gosh) A Liberal?
Oh No was that meant for me, Oh gee please let me know so I can set the record straight.
Not a Liberal, or how did we call them people back then, Oh Yeah!
Bleeding Heart Liberals, Yeah! I really used to love using that expression.
I have a clip to a song on my site, liked the clip the song is Democracy is coming to the USA.
The clip goes as follows
I am not on the right and not on the left,
I love the Country but I hate the ——–
So I am sitting at home tonight in front of –
blah blah
So see, not right not left not liberal, just me.
My beliefs my thoughts none of which belong to any category
Now if that was not meant for me I am sorry
Suzanne
Hi Buck
either my eyes are going bad or this type is getting smaller
Which is it?
Paul Says: April 30th, 2005 at 10:13 pm
Neither right nor left, just convinced that the Vast Christian Right Wing Conspiracy is out to rule the world, right Suzanne?
Lug Says: May 2nd, 2005 at 3:19 am
Boooo! Look out Liberals!!! The religious right’s coming to your house to baptize you at gun point!!!
Suzanne Says: May 3rd, 2005 at 9:02 am
Hey, I just put a new goodie on this subject
See, I am afraid that nay day the Religious Right is going to be knocking at my door with a shotgun and try to babtize me, Oh My Goodness, what if they think I am Jewish, HELP
does not matter what religion I am it is my business and my business only, not yours not theirs not anyone but between my God and myself
God Bless American
because someone Must!
Suzanne
Paul Says: May 3rd, 2005 at 9:12 pm
Got bad news for you Suzanne, any Christian who would come knocking on your door looking to baptize you by force…..wouldn’t be Christian. The bible says “..all who would..”, thus indicating the need for personal choice. Although in the past there have been those who used the name of “Christian” to obtain power, that does not mean that they represent what Jesus Christ truly desires. He wants communion with a willing heart, not forced slaves. That is why you will always hear me say that I do not agree with legislating morals as the government should never be given the church’s responsibility.
When you paint with a broad brush, make sure you dont splatter paint.
Suzanne Says: May 9th, 2005 at 7:36 am
OH Number 14 Yeah! and a double YEAH!
Number 17 guess you do not live in UTAH!!
Please no one misunderstand me, I love God and I love Him in my way not your way not the government’s way. This is all I want, nothing more nothing less.
Is this a big deal?
Religious Right why is it named the “Religious Right”
Why not just the -Perfect Right-t or the -Right and we are Wrong- or how about being normal and let us just call them the Present Government Republicans. That seems more normal than -The Religious Right, Why?
Because it really is saying that, I am not right
Does that mean I am wrong, or I am dumb or I am off center?
Hey, I am right, you are right, and they are right as everyone has the right to think they are right even if they are so wrong.
Why can’t we call them the Political Right or -The Environment Destruction Right-. On the other hand, how about -The Right to Make the World Hate Us.
Just not the Religious Right because how about those people who do not believe in that Right Religion, are they wrong?
If I said I was Jewish that would mean I am not right. This reminds me of a sad time not so long ago.
I think it is the wording, they are right I am wrong and actually has anyone asked GOD who is right?
I do not think so and if they have, I doubt He answered.
Suzanne
General Suzanne Davis Katz USAF-SF
PS: Just because the Bible states that, do you actually believe people follow everything in the Bible?
I have a favorite little saying about Bible ttoting and scripture quoting Saturday Night AD—- Born Again Christians, (not all but my way too often experience) just could not put in all the words as there are many wonderful Born Again Christians.
Now way are we disagreeing Your last statement is exactly what I have been so hard trying to get over, three commentarys, and too many comments to think about, and hey you agree
Made my day
Thanks
Oh as an artist I never never splatter paint.
Mr. Jack Says: May 15th, 2005 at 2:17 am
Dude, suzane isn’t a libral. she’s a moderate. I think you conservitives need to realize, that theres more then 2 political philosiphies, in fact there are quite a few, including librals, conservitives, socalists, progressives, moderates, and nationalists, and a few more im probably leaving out. don’t be so narrow minded and say that everyone who doesn’t agree with you is a libral, because it’s not true
Suzanne Says: May 15th, 2005 at 4:59 am
Hey I like you Mr Jack!!
Yes, there is not just two political philosiphies, actually there should be just as many as there are people walking the earth.
Too many narrow minded people, too many brainwashed people and what I think too many people actually scared to voice what they really believe.
I am never scared to speak my mind. If one does not like what I write Hey do not read it.
and you are so right, just because one does not agree with someone elses thoughts does not make them a liberal, it makes them a person with a mind that is not scared to think. To learn, to ask question, and more than that to think for themselves and not go blind and believe everyting the present government tells us.
Hey we all know this shit is not true.
Thanks again Mr Jack, I think you are as I am you think for yourself, but more than that you stuck up for me, why, this is so nice.
Moderate? I am a flower child during the begining of the movement, I protested against the protesters, I lost a husband in the Vietnam war. I watched this country loose its innocence.
I cried when President Kennedy was Killed and when Bobby was Killed and when Martin was killed.
I cried when I saw what this country was becoming.
I still cry, but I still have hope see everyone is not of the Religious Right, 51% is not a huge margin considering the other choice. I am neither Republician or Democrate I vote for the man, This last election, well Bush was better that the Protester, (my Vietnam years)
I wish we could have a Jewish President, wow , that would be great. Would that not just kill the Religious right? Oh what a laugh
Just thinking as Suzanne love to do.
A citizen of the world
Born in America
Just a girl with the name of flowers
Suzanne Says: May 15th, 2005 at 6:23 am
OK I still want to know who #9 - #11 and #12 those comments who is the person in question?
Please answer Please Please.
Oh gee come on it won’t hurt you.
Could not be me of course
Love
Suzanne
The Moderate! YEAH! I like that title, and the self thinking title.
Still think I am in love with Mr Jack!!
He does understand me, and has brains at that and an open mind, wow, on this site, thought is was just me, Julian and a couple of others, but wow, Mr Jack, nice to meet you.
Suzanne
Suzanne Says: May 15th, 2005 at 6:58 am
COMMENT TO NUMBER 10
Sorry about these words but
Bill Shit!
You have not the slightest idea of what you are talking about. I voted for President Bush, why, because he was better choice than the other idiot was, both were idiots, but picked the lesser of the two evils.
I have never once stated I was for the one idiot only that I voted for the lesser idiot.
I never said I was against this war, also never said I was for it. I fought in it, so that must mean something.
Do not compare me with the stupid movie Star Wars. This is not a movie, this is life.
I say I am an American, dare say I am not and I will come up fighting so hard you will never forget my wrath.
I have the right just as you have the right to agree or to disagree with the present government this does not make me a Liberal or a liar, or any other stupid title you give me or others like me.
Grow up. Learn about life in the big city.
Who would have been the worst President? Hard question, but see, because I never protested against my country, and because my first husband was killed in Vietnam and because I protested against the protesters, how could I ever have voted for what is his name. So what other choice did I have? It is sad when one must decide on whom to vote for by deciding which one lacks more than the other does for being President. Hard, very hard.
Do not call me a Liberal, do no call me; The Drama Queen
““Drama Queen”! Careful or she will unleash her wordy wrath on you”
But the last part could be very true! (My wordy wrath).
No, not a drama Queen, just a girl. Who has never forgotten how to think and still remembers those terrible years of Vietnam.
I watched this country torn apart, just as it is being torn apart now.
Do not state what you think I think –
EXAMPLE:
“Vast Christian Right Wing Conspiracy is out to rule the world”
Sorry, no I do not think this to be true.
Number 10 watch out your about to get my wrath
COMMENT FROM NUMBER 10 -
“The moral: In a war, you can’t join the battle, and then say you support the other side and shout “FRIENDLY FIRE” when you are targeted. It doesn’t work that way, Suzanne”.
How in the world did you come up with such a stupid, comment about anything I have ever written about on this site?
Why, because I state that I believe in the Bill of Rights and this is Friendly Fire?
Hey I am neck deep in the battle, and will not quite till the battle is won, and this statement goes so much further than you will ever know.
Do not assume anything about me, for assumption is as close to stupidly as stupidly is to assumptions.
Now do you think this is my wordy wrath?
Naw, I am in a good mood, this is just warm up time and just to show you a slight example of what is to come.
Besides I am listening to Lara Fabian, and it is a beautiful Saturday Night, the air is clean, the music is in French beautiful love songs, so, and wrath will wait for Sunday when I listen to “Democracy is coming to the USA”
YEAH!
Or of course Tradition “Fiddler on the Roof” some of you could learn a lot from that song, Oops it is Jewish though, well, it is on my site not in its complete form, but if you would like a copy I would be glad to send you an attachment for you to listen to
Also an attachment of the song
“My Oh My” You know sitting on your Picket Fence?
Love and kisses and wordy wrath
Suzanne
Mr. Jack Says: May 15th, 2005 at 9:44 pm
while you’re talking about the bible, doesn’t it say “Love thy neighbor” and “Hate the sin, not the sinner”? then why are conservitives activly attacking the rights of homosexuals because “It’s a sin!” It makes no sence! and forgive me if Im wrong but doesn’t our very own constitution claim that “all men are equil in the eyes of god” and that all people hvae the rights to LIFE, LIBERTY, and the Presute of HAPPINESS!
Mr. Jack Says: May 16th, 2005 at 12:56 am
also suzzanne, what would really kill the religous right, would be a gay pope, hell that’d bring down the entire catholic church.
Mr. Jack Says: May 16th, 2005 at 12:59 am
and also, the legislative branch of the government buck, is congress, judges have nothing to do with it. Judges are parts of the JUDICIAL BRANCH that inturpret and decide the constitutionality of the laws, I think you need to go back to school dude.
Suzanne Says: June 1st, 2005 at 7:17 am
ABSOLUTE POWER GOES HAND IN HAND WITH THE PATRIOT ACT AND ID ACT!
Administration Asks Appeals Court To Compel ISP Searches
The Bush Administration wants to compel ISPs to turn over information about subscribers as part of its fight against terrorism.
By Mark Sherman, The Associated Press
May 30, 2005
URL: http://www.informationweek.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=163702011
WASHINGTON (AP)–The Bush administration asked a federal appeals court Friday to restore its ability to compel Internet service providers to turn over information about their customers or subscribers as part of its fight against terrorism.
The legal filing with the 2nd Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in New York comes amid a debate in Congress over renewal of the Patriot Act and whether to expand the FBI’s power to seek records without the approval of a judge or grand jury.
U.S. District Judge Victor Marrero of New York last year blocked the government from conducting secret searches of communications records, saying the law that authorized them wrongly barred legal challenges and imposed a gag order on affected businesses. The ruling came in a lawsuit by the American Civil Liberties Union and an Internet access firm that received a national security letter (NSL) from the FBI demanding records. The identity of the firm remains secret.
The government was authorized to pursue communications records as part of a 1986 law. Its powers were enhanced by the Patriot Act in 2001.
The administration said the judge’s ruling was off the mark because the company did mount a legal challenge to the demand for records. “Yet in this very case, the recipient of the NSL did precisely what the NSLs supposedly prevent recipients from doing,” the filing said.
The law’s ban on disclosing that such a letter has been received also is appropriate because of legitimate security concerns, the government said.
But Attorney Jameel Jaffer said the law does not contain a provision to challenge the FBI’s demand for documents. The firm filed the lawsuit to challenge the law’s constitutionality on the grounds that it doesn’t contain such a provision, he said.
“Most people who get NSLs don’t know they can bring a challenge in court because the statute doesn’t say they can,” he said. “No one has filed a motion to quash in 20 years.”
The ban on disclosure is so broad that the initially filed the suit was under seal and negotiated for weeks on a version that could be released to the public.
Previously censored material released several months after Marrero’s ruling included innocuous material the government wanted withheld, the ACLU said, including the phrase “national security” and this sentence from a statement by an FBI agent: “I am a Special Agent of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.”
Suzanne,
Just a girl with the name of Flowers
and
The Moderate Drama Queen
Suzanne Says: June 2nd, 2005 at 2:50 am
Did you dare me Buck? Remember Brown, the nice sweet black lady, (never dare me Buck as you will always loose)
Well here goes and follow the links it is all there
Nominated to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
A review of California Supreme Court Justice Janice Rogers Brown’s record to date raises serious questions and grave concerns about her persistent and disturbing hostility to affirmative action, civil rights, the rights of people with disabilities, workers’ rights, and criminal rights. In addition, Brown has often been the lone justice to dissent on the California Supreme Court, illustrating that her judicial philosophy is outside the mainstream. Not only does she show an inability to dispassionately review cases, her opinions are based on extremist ideology that ignores judicial precedent, including that set by the U.S. Supreme Court.
http://saveourcourts.civilrights.org/nominees/details.cfm?id=31370
Leadership Conference on Civil Rights
Justice Brown’s colleagues on the California Supreme Court, including her conservative colleagues, have openly criticized her for misrepresenting state and federal court holdings, flouting the legislature’s will, and trying to remake the law in order to impose her own views - in one case chiding her for seeking to “impos[e] [a] personal theory of political economy on the people of a democratic state.”1 The Alliance for Justice opposes Justice Brown’s nomination. The Senate should not confirm her.
http://saveourcourts.civilrights.org/nominees/details.cfm?id=30971
http://saveourcourts.civilrights.org/search/details.cfm?id=18868
Suzanne Says: June 2nd, 2005 at 3:01 am
Looks like I have not been a good girl and coming her and answering comments. But had dreams to follow places to see and people to do.
But I am back
Now to My Man MR JACK: YEAH on 23 and 24 and 25.
Know something, even the Jewish people respect the homosexuals, they treat them with respect and understanding. Oops, but the Jewish people do not believe Jesus was the son of God. Oh well.
So back to our constitution, (even though this President has decided not to follow it anymore) Yes, LIFE, LIBERTY and the Presute of HAPPINESS!
What to know something else, and this is what really bothers me about this Religious Right Holy than thou group.
It does not bother me if two men or two women fall in love and do their thing, If this is their desire, and they are happy, so be it. They are not hurting anyone, they are runing a home just the same as a man and woman, (sometimes even better,) I also think but can not right now prove, the breakup between so called married (either legal or by their own means) of Gay couples is in the very low percentage, even if you take into consideration there are more Male/Female marriages, than same sex marriage.
Odd, wonder why?
Oh Koool to 24, Hey I have even a better idea, how about for President, a Gay, Jewish, Liberal!
Married to a Gay Jewish Moderate. and for Vise President, a Moderate Drama Queen!!!!!!!!!
When I first posted my commentary on this subject I go so much flack like I was way off base, buy hey what is going on now, exactly what I said was wrong is wrong
Suzanne
The Moderate Drama Queen