Monday, April 02, 2007

unconstitutional insanity from the liberal loons on the supreme court

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/02/washington/02cnd-scotus.html?ei=5065&en=dfd85a975f8ffb18&ex=1176177600&adxnnl=
1&partner=MYWAY&adxnnlx=1175564129-aXhEd5CkBaCNeyp5g6hVbQ

Words don't adequately express just how outrageous this Supreme Court decision is. I would like to say that this decision illustrates just how important electing a conservative Republican president is, but the facts contradict me. Three of the five liberal loons on the bench were appointed by GOP presidents (Stevens, Kennedy and Souter). Breyer was confirmed by a GOP Senate. Ginsberg, possibly the most radical leftist banana in the bunch, was confirmed 96-3 by the Senate. In other words, "our" GOP was complicit in this crime against America.

Here's the bottom line: the U.S. Supreme Court just ruled that our government must follow the pseudo-religion of global warming, even though real science doesn't support this scam. Justice Stevens actually wrote, as part of his majority opinion, that global warming has been decided by science. It's bad enough that Stevens uses foreign law to decide cases. Now, he's using science fiction to decide cases!

Here's where a strong president would come in handy. The correct response by the Bush administration would be to announce to the nation that this particular decision is an unconstitutional, illegal decision, and that it will be ignored. I'm not holding my breath.

Related link: http://newsbusters.org/node/11766

2 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Actually it's not unconstitutional at all. You don't like the ruling, so you say it's unconstitutional. However, under the clean air act the EPA is given the right to control emissions of compounds found to alter our climate. Period. This current ruling merely states that carbon DOES alter climate. You will not find a wack-job loon of a scientist out there that won't agree that more carbon in the atmosphere leads to warming. Even the OISM paper that you adore beyond contention shows that carbon leads to warming. What's in dispute now is if that is a bad thing or not. If you have a problem with this ruling it's because you have a problem with the clean air act.

6:26 PM  
Blogger hondo said...

No, what I have a problem with is that the Supreme Court, an unelected group of activists unaccountable to the voters, has just amended the Clean Air Act to say that carbon dioxide is a pollutant that needs to be regulated because it's destroying the earth. That's insane, and there are literally thousands of climate scientists all over the world who agree with me. You might have missed this in your high school science class, but CO2 is produced when man exhales. The Supreme Court ruling gives the federal government the power to regulate that.

By the way, reputable climate scientists all over the world agree that the earth has gone through cycles of warming and cooling ever since creation. Man has nothing to do with it. The five black-robed lunatics just passed a law from the bench (which is beyond their constitutional powers) saying that the federal government now will have unprecedented powers to regulate personal conduct and economic development. Our constitutional republic is one step closer to extinction thanks to this new law unconstitutionally legislated by our judiciary.

7:40 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Free Counter
Counters