zdf_jammin
Geek
Age: -
Gender: -
Posts: 432 | August 1st, 2005 at 03:30pm This topic is kinda old, but i was thinking about it....
they say there's supposed to be a balance in government, what with vetos and percentage votes and such, but dont you think the court has a lot of power, maybe too much, esp. since you stay in it until you decide to leave, thats a lot. and i mean, like they say, its a way for presidents to leave a mark of themselves after they leave, even maybe after they're dead.
i dont really agree with presidents reappointing everyone when they go into office, which used to happen. but i think that there should be a certain term for justices..
what you think? |
Dom
Jackass
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 1691 | August 1st, 2005 at 03:57pm im not sure what you really mean, explain a bit more?are you on about the judicial system in general or what? |
zdf_jammin
Geek
Age: -
Gender: -
Posts: 432 | August 1st, 2005 at 05:45pm yea, i know, i was kinda sloppy.
what im thinking about is pretty much the justice system, and whether or not they should have terms |
Kitti
Falling In Love With The Board
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 5688 | August 1st, 2005 at 11:18pm they should, and it shouldnt be based on appointments by the president, no matter who he is. i dont think thats right...whether its that all the justices are siding with bush or a democratic candidate, this bothers me because we really need balance and fairness there (in the judicial system) most in this country. even as the borderline arch-liberal i am, i will scream everytime theres imbalance in the court system...and there is. |
zdf_jammin
Geek
Age: -
Gender: -
Posts: 432 | August 1st, 2005 at 11:23pm yea, there is, and thats not really justice, is it? as much as people who really like their party want it that way, its not justice, is it?
but... congress does have to approve, but then again, thats very one sided too.... |
Kitti
Falling In Love With The Board
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 5688 | August 1st, 2005 at 11:39pm yep. im not asking for a new president, im not saying any other would do a job that is better or worse than bush's, but lets face it, there is no balance. |
FlunkieStargazer711
Shoot Me, I'm A Newbie
Age: -
Gender: -
Posts: 29 | August 2nd, 2005 at 12:17am well i think its rediculous , and i dont think even having more democrats would help right now...bush just appointed Bolton to embassador....he basically threw away wat the senate was saying...the democrats didnt want this guy and wouldnt vote for him so he just bypassed them....my guess is that he appointed some republican friend of his...and the democrtas in senate didnt see that as a good thing...for obvious reasons...but yeah...thats stupid |
St.JimmyT9109
Geek
Age: -
Gender: -
Posts: 259 | August 2nd, 2005 at 03:06am i think they should have terms like everyone else...its not fair if they get to decide everything they want for life |
eberneezer_egghead
Falling In Love With The Board
Age: 33
Gender: Female
Posts: 5484 | August 2nd, 2005 at 10:22am I think most people that i know would like a new prime minister, but then again, they voted for him. |
