Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - jeffislouie

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 ... 52
31
General Off-Topic Board / Re: Why Obama will lose in the fall
« on: October 31, 2008, 02:28:50 PM »
John Mccain has more experience blowing up planes than any terrorist I've heard of. They've all blown up one. He's destroyed three. That's impressive.



John McCain was a bomber pilot, which may explain why he didn't blow up very many planes numbnuts.

Bomber pilots rarely, if ever, shoot down planes.  The drop bombs on target.

Stop being an idiot.  Thank you.

32
General Off-Topic Board / Re: Why Obama will lose in the fall
« on: October 31, 2008, 02:25:09 PM »
Quote

But what do I know, I'm no constitutional law professor who refuses to release any of my law school work, lectures, or harvard law review articles.


http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0808/12705.html

So the Politico managed to dig up one harvard law review article.  Try to read better, especially lines like this:

"But Obama has never mentioned his law review piece, a demurral that's part of his campaign's broader pattern of rarely volunteering information or documents about the candidate, even when relatively innocuous."

Doesn't that prove him to be a liar when he said this:
http://www.nhpr.org/node/14401

"Obama said that as president, he would run the most open and transparent government in history. He said when he puts together health care legislation, the planning sessions will be carried on C-SPAN."

What transparency?  You mean how he refuses to release his medical records, school records, and an unaltered version of his birth certificate?

Maybe you mean the transparency of kicking reporters off his bus for endorsing McCain?
http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/10/31/obama-plane-pitches-reporters-mccain-endorsing-papers/

Or maybe cancelling interviews with stations whose reporters ask tough questions?
http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/entertainment_tv_tvblog/2008/10/obama-campaign.html

Freedom of the press used to be something that mattered.  Now it only matters if the press is writing lovely puff pieces about the Obama campaign.  And you are okay with that....

Funny - I seem to recall folks being upset with the Bush administration for 'controlling' the media, but when Obama does it is is a-ok.

Flip to the flop homies.

33
General Off-Topic Board / Re: Why Obama will lose in the fall
« on: October 31, 2008, 02:19:35 PM »
I guess you might not agree with the notion that the constitution is a 'living document'?

False.  The constitution IS a living document.  And there is a 'right' way to change it and a 'wrong' way to change it.
The right way is the way that the framers intended - through the introduction of new amendments.  The wrong way is the way liberals have always tried to change it - the easier way - by having judges alter the constitution.

It's funny, all the 'smart folks' here with backgrounds in law seem to be perfectly okay to hand over the power of the legislature to the judiciary branch, fully ignoring the intention of the framers.

The truth is, it is far easier to simply have a judge say 'this is what the constitution says' rather than, you know, have legislators legislate what the constitution says.  It is far more difficult to introduce a new amendment than it is to stack liberal activist judges on the SCOTUS and have them create new amendments.

http://usgovinfo.about.com/library/blconstamend.htm


34
General Off-Topic Board / Re: Why Obama will lose in the fall
« on: October 30, 2008, 02:30:13 PM »
Yes, I'm quite sure that spending an unprecedented $600 million plus really plays well with the 'average middle class american', especially after he spent $4 million to air a $20 million commercial full of lies and exaggerations.  Nothing says "I care about the middle class" like spending well over half a billion dollars during a financial crisis.

This is the oath every President is required to take:

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

Interesting, especially since Obama said in 2001:
The Constitution " reflected the fundamental flaw of this country that continues to this day” .

http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/entry/obama_constitution_fundamentally_flawed

Well THAT's certainly not protecting or defending the Constitution now, is it?

And then there's this statement on what the great one will look for in a judge, which should absolutely disgust you if you are, you know, interested in the law...

"We need somebody who's got the heart, the empathy, to recognize what it's like to be a young teenage mom. The empathy to understand what it's like to be poor, or African-American, or gay, or disabled, or old."

That's not how the law works and not how a judge is supposed to do his job.  As a matter of fact, every professor I've ever had has stressed that the law is not emotional and shouldn't be decided based on emotion.

Activist judges are not qualified to sit on the Supreme Court.

But what do I know, I'm no constitutional law professor who refuses to release any of my law school work, lectures, or harvard law review articles.

There is also absolutely no chance that I registered for school as a foreign national in order to get scholarship or grant money.

So I could be wrong...


35
General Off-Topic Board / Re: Why Obama will lose in the fall
« on: October 17, 2008, 01:19:02 PM »
The truth about Ayers - Obama and his people continue to lie about him and minimize his influence over Obama:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122411943821339043.html?mod=rss_opinion_main




36
General Off-Topic Board / Re: Why Obama will lose in the fall
« on: October 17, 2008, 12:56:40 PM »
Yet another lie by Obama that most of you are willing to accept because he isn't a Republican:

http://www.timesleader.com/news/breakingnews/Secret_Service_says_Kill_him_allegation_unfounded_.html

"The first story, written by reporter David Singleton, appeared with allegations that while congressional candidate Chris Hackett was addressing the crowd and mentioned Obama’s name a man in the audience shouted “kill him."
..............

Agent Bill Slavoski said he was in the audience, along with an undisclosed number of additional secret service agents and other law enforcement officers and not one heard the comment.

“I was baffled,” he said after reading the report in Wednesday’s Times-Tribune.

He said the agency conducted an investigation Wednesday, after seeing the story, and could not find one person to corroborate the allegation other than Singleton.

Slavoski said more than 20 non-security agents were interviewed Wednesday, from news media to ordinary citizens in attendance at the rally for the Republican vice presidential candidate held at the Riverfront Sports Complex. He said Singleton was the only one to say he heard someone yell “kill him.”

“We have yet to find someone to back up the story,” Slavoski said. “We had people all over and we have yet to find anyone who said they heard it.”

Hackett said he did not hear the remark."

Lies, lies, and more lies.  Race baiting and lies.  That's the campaign in a nutshell.

Obama hammers McCain and implies that McCain intends to cut taxes for the rich and raise taxes on the middle class.  The fact is, that's an outright falsehood.
McCain wants to keep the taxes EXACTLY THE SAME on the middle class.  His plan is to preserve the last round of tax cuts and keep the nation's tax code as it is until we get through the financial crisis.  Of course, we all know Obama wants to RAISE taxes on those who make more than $250k and increase corportate taxes, which can only lead to one conclusion (and economists say this, not me)
-increase in the cost of goods (corporations include their tax costs in the price of their goods and services and always have)
-less job creation (with less money at their disposal, companies and individuals are less likely to hire than they are to fire)
-less growth (why grow your company to earn MORE than $250k a year if it means getting taxed to the point that it is advantageous to make less than $250k?)
-redistribution of wealth (Obama's plan is to take from the rich and give that money to the poor by issuing the poor checks paid for by the rich - just for being an American)
-More fraud (businesses are likely to splinter off multiple companies to avoid paying more taxes - one company sells the product, another installs it, and another supports it - 3 companies filing individually, each with less than $250k a year in income)

All is not lost, America.  My unscientific method of putting a 'NObama' sticker in my window has resulted in 100% approval and zero negative reaction.... People are literally honking at me until I roll down my window to tell me they love my sticker.


37
General Off-Topic Board / Re: Why Obama will lose in the fall
« on: October 16, 2008, 04:46:34 PM »
Obama's REAL record and Fannie and Freddie:
http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/obama_voted_present_on_fannie_mae_freddie_mac_reform/

"Finally, on the matter of deregulation and the financial crisis, Sen. Obama should consider his own complicity in the failure of Congress to adopt legislation that might have prevented the subprime meltdown.

In the summer of 2005, a bill emerged from the Senate Banking Committee that considerably tightened regulations on Fannie and Freddie, including controls over their capital and their ability to hold portfolios of mortgages or mortgage-backed securities. All the Republicans voted for the bill in committee; all the Democrats voted against it. To get the bill to a vote in the Senate, a few Democratic votes were necessary to limit debate. This was a time for the leadership Sen. Obama says he can offer, but neither he nor any other Democrat stepped forward.

Instead, by his own account, Mr. Obama wrote a letter to the Treasury Secretary, allegedly putting himself on record that subprime loans were dangerous and had to be dealt with. This is revealing; if true, it indicates Sen. Obama knew there was a problem with subprime lending — but was unwilling to confront his own party by pressing for legislation to control it. As a demonstration of character and leadership capacity, it bears a strong resemblance to something else in Sen. Obama’s past: voting present."

The truth about Obama's tax plan (finally):
http://www.nypost.com/php/pfriendly/print.php?url=http://www.nypost.com/seven/10152008/postopinion/editorials/obama_tells_the_tax_truth_133633.htm

"Heretofore, Obama has sought to paint himself as a tax-cutter - claiming he'll slash taxes for 95 percent of Americans.

As we noted yesterday, that's a flat-out lie - not least because nearly half of all tax filers pay no income tax at all. So how can he "cut" their taxes if they don't pay any to begin with?

Answer: tax "credits."

To wit, in part:

* A $1,000 "make work pay" credit.

* A $4,000 college-tuition credit.

* A $6,000 child-care credit.

* A $1,100 bump in the earned-income tax credit.

These aren't to be income-tax deductions - which would be worthless to those who pay no income taxes.

These are to be checks from Washington - with the subsidies expected to grow to more than $1 trillion in 10 years.

That's a massive transfer of wealth.

How does Obama justify it?

"Fairness," he says.

But that's an absurdly radical view of what's "fair."

Remember, Obama's tax hikes target folks who already bear the brunt of the burden: The top 20 percent of earners already pay 69 percent of all federal taxes - and 88 percent of income taxes."

When will you people accept that Obama is a liar?  When will you people realize that Obama is nothing more than a slick, dirty Chicago politician?

Obama wrongly states that McCain voted "with President Bush" 90% of the time.  Presidents don't vote in the Senate.  Senators do.  Unless, of course, you are Obama, in which case you can vote 'present'.

Does it bother you that Obama voted with is party 97% of the time?

Nah.  He's not Bush and Bush isn't a democrat.



38
General Off-Topic Board / Re: Why Obama will lose in the fall
« on: October 14, 2008, 05:06:35 PM »
Just because I know you aren't likely to read the actual letter, here it is:

i'd read it before you'd heard of it.



Then why try to make an argument against it by using an Economist Poll of what anonymous, unnamed economists think?
Because you hadn't read it.

Regardless of the Economist poll, Obama's tax plan is wealth redistribution and a farce.  It takes from those that create jobs to give to those who work jobs.  Economists believe, overwhelmingly, that this will result in FEWER jobs and more of a welfare state than we currently have.

Great plan!

Maybe I should quit my job and find a minimum wage one so I can get me a big fat Obama government check!

39
General Off-Topic Board / Re: Why Obama will lose in the fall
« on: October 14, 2008, 05:03:03 PM »
Yep, Obama is the cause of the worldwide financial collapse. Credit is frozen and foreign investors are worried about the US capital gains tax rate.

Only whiny liberals seek to place blame on one person for everything.  Me personally?  I can't wait until Bush is out of office so I can finally stop hearing effete liberals blame the worlds ills on him.

Obama is PART of the UNITED STATES market collapse.  See, big time investors are smarter than you.  They understand that if the capital gains tax goes up, it digs into their profit on investments.  There are two ways to combat that problem:
1) Work hard to get McCain elected
or
2) get all of your money out of the stock market.

Obama isn't the ONLY person to blame for the worldwide financial crisis, but he is partially to blame.
I guess while you and your soft socialists were meeting to figure out how to squash any and all negative information about the Great One King Obama, you chose to overlook it.
Just like you chose to overlook the bill McCain helped sponsor to provide oversight to Fannie and Freddie was voted down by the democrats.  It's all BUSH'S fault!  It's not like Republicans tried to deal with this problem a few years back while Barney Frank and others said there was nothing to worry about.  It's not like Chris Dodd and Obama were the recipients of the most money from Fannie and Freddie.  It's not like Barney Frank was banging a Fannie exec.  It was Bush, all Bush, and none other than Bush.  Just like you ignore the fact that Obama voted to raise taxes 94 times.  Just like you ignore the fact that Obama asked for close to $1 million a DAY since being in the Senate.  Just like you ignore Wright, Ayers, ACORN, the CAC, and Pfleger.  You keep on ignoring and pretend, like Michelle Obama commands you to, that 'the american people aren't asking these questions.'
Bush evil.  Obama saint.
Saint Obama.
Did they ever dig up his birth certificate?  I'm just wondering, because that's sort of a requirement for the job he's been applying for.....

Like I said before, many investors are pulling OUT of the market (if they haven't already).  One compelling motivating factor is that Obama will increase taxes on capital gains, making it disadvantageous to hold on to investments.

I disagree with McCain on some policy, but Obama has NO record, NO honesty, and NO experience.  He's not a President for our times, that is unless you want our times to be more like the Great Depression (the last time gov. increased taxes in response to market issues).



40
General Off-Topic Board / Re: Why Obama will lose in the fall
« on: October 14, 2008, 01:34:57 PM »
Are you wondering why the market is taking such a huge hit?
Recently, I've seen some interviews with investors who are afraid that Obama might just win and start raping investors with his capital gains tax increase.  Some, sensing the great rape, have gotten out of the market to take advantage of the current tax rates on capital gains, saving (in some cases) millions.
It makes sense - what is the benefit of investing if Obama wins and takes away a larger chunk of your profits?

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 ... 52