Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Am I the only one peeved about Sandra Day O'Connor's criticism towards....

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
LynneSin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-13-06 11:41 AM
Original message
Am I the only one peeved about Sandra Day O'Connor's criticism towards....
the republican party.

I mean, she helped give them power with the Supreme Court ruling that pretty much shutdown the count in Florida even though we're finding out that Gore probably won the state.

Despite how she voted on that, I still respected her because I knew she was there for us with anything related to RoeVWade and a few other important issues. She was like the very best of the very worst in the Supreme COurt.

Now she says that the repukes are leading us into a Dictatorship. Miss Sandy Dee - why didn't you think of that back when you made your decision on Bush v. Gore. Siding with the other side would have simply allowed for the vote-counting to be complete and possibly send our country on a completely different direction than where it is today.

Your criticisms over what is happening now is nothing more than trying to clean your conscious of WHAT YOU HELPED TO CREATE. Personally, when you're rotting in hell I hope the souls of all the people that died because of the Bush Regime haunt you for eternity!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
harpo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-13-06 11:42 AM
Response to Original message
1. repukes aren't known for their foresight
;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bowens43 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-13-06 11:43 AM
Response to Original message
2. .never mind
Edited on Mon Mar-13-06 11:43 AM by bowens43
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jacobin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-13-06 11:44 AM
Response to Reply #2
4. Have you READ Bush v. Gore?
Google it up and see what constitutional experts from BOTH parties say
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LynneSin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-13-06 11:44 AM
Response to Reply #2
5. Sorry, this time they were wrong with 'the law'
She even came out and said she wanted to retire when there was a republican president. And too many people have put Grand Canyon size holes in 'the law' used to decide that outcome.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jacobin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-13-06 11:43 AM
Response to Original message
3. She was part of the junta that appointed Bush president
She is a classic ass hat who now wants to distance herself from the carnage and destruction of a nation that she wrought.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Southsideirish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-13-06 12:06 PM
Response to Reply #3
17. My sentiments exactly. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ET Awful Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-13-06 11:46 AM
Response to Original message
6. Not to mention the fact that she forwarded their agenda even more
with her retirement. Had she just stuck it out a few more years, she could have prevented at least one of the two new slimeballs from becoming part of the problem.`
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dhalgren Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-13-06 11:46 AM
Response to Original message
7. If she thinks that her position and money will keep her out of the
detention camps, she'd better think again....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dogday Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-13-06 11:46 AM
Response to Original message
8. It is a heavy burden she carries...
By admitting now, what she should of voted against then, is a little too late.. She can't dump this message out there and think it makes it all better, it just makes me know she can see what is happening in this country and she was a party to it.....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wtmusic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-13-06 11:51 AM
Response to Original message
9. agree
the darkest moment in SCOTUS history, bar none. A monumental failure of judgement on the part of one person has damaged the nation irreparably.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Demit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-13-06 11:51 AM
Response to Original message
10. I have to wonder who the hell her message was meant for.
She tells it to a roomful of lawyers, with no public dissemination. Who's she trying to be relevant for? Or is she hoping to salvage her legacy?

It's a good message, but I think of her as being pretty wounded in the credibility department. This half-assed warning doesn't help.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JitterbugPerfume Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-13-06 11:52 AM
Response to Original message
11. to little to late SANDY
live with it
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marie26 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-13-06 11:53 AM
Response to Original message
12. Better late than never. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
azmouse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-13-06 11:53 AM
Response to Original message
13. Too soon old, too late smart.
I'm sick about what she is saying now when she had the chance to change things for the better in 2000.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AndyA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-13-06 11:55 AM
Response to Original message
14. The timing of her retirement couldn't have been worse
She should have left while Clinton was in office, or waited until Bush was out of office. That is, if she's truly concerned about the country. Actions speak louder than words, Mrs. O'Connor. And your actions, just like those of the Bush Administration, clearly say, "F*ck you, America."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Norquist Nemesis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-13-06 11:55 AM
Response to Original message
15. Not me
If anything, when the Coulters, Hannitys, Limbaughs and Savages trash her as a liberal then her vote in Bush v. Gore is perfect to throw that strawman out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
samdogmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-13-06 11:55 AM
Response to Original message
16. Has anyone read Vincent Bugliosi's book "The Betrayal of America--
How the Supreme Court Undermined the Constitution and Chose our President". He pretty much accuses the five of treason. Ms. O'Connor is lucky she's not in jail. I have NO sympathy for her and blame her for the debacle we are all living with today.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
moobu2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-13-06 12:07 PM
Response to Original message
18. She’s just trying to cover her ass

As it relates to how she will be perceived historically. I welcome her criticisms, but She’s a day late and a dollar short..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
foreverdem Donating Member (759 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-13-06 12:09 PM
Response to Original message
19. She helped create it
For her to come out now and criticize what she helped create is deplorable. Too late now Sandy to try and distance yourself from it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catherine Vincent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-13-06 12:09 PM
Response to Original message
20. LOL! No, you're not.
You must not have seen the thread by CatWoman instructing Ms. O'Connor to kiss her fat black azz. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zbdent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-13-06 01:16 PM
Response to Original message
21. Nope -
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Syncronaut Seven Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-13-06 01:19 PM
Response to Original message
22. She's back peddling fast!
I do not believe that supreme court justices are immune from charges of felony corruption.

She's just trying to buy herself some deniability.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tesha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-13-06 02:03 PM
Response to Original message
23. Too little, *FAR TOO LATE*! (NT)
December 11th, 2000 was the right time to speak out.
Now is far, far too late.

Tesha
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 03rd 2024, 04:53 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC