The Republican Nomination For President: The Race For The Race For The White House

@JPB,

I am too! It bothers me still that Obama expanded the war in Afghanistan by adding 50,000 more troops, and he's still undecided about the remaining troops in Iraq.

Our security at home is being demolished by spending money in other countries where we do not belong, and all we are doing is building resentment by the people in the Middle East.

0 Replies

Real Clear Politics does a "polls of polls." Here is one showing how Obama does against possible GOP candidates. Polls were taken prior to the Monday night debates. The % shown is how much Obama leads by on average amongst the various pollsters.
Vs:
Romney: 4.8%
Pawlenty: 13.8%
Palin: 18%
Bachmann: 17.7%
Cain: 15.7%
Gingrich: 14.7%
Paul: 11%
Huntsman: 14.0

There are many caveats. It is early. A number of these people have not formally announced and name recognition for some can be low.
The interesting thing will be to see what it looks like after the Republican debate and after Obama's post Bin Laden bounce faded.

3 Replies

@ossobuco,

I now see that you meant that your hatred was bipartisan because you hate Hillary Clinton as well as Bachman.

I believe you are misusing the term, but I get what you mean.

Please disregard my prior post.

0 Replies

@realjohnboy,

It's early, but it will provide us a base from which we can see changes during the coming months.

0 Replies

@realjohnboy,

Do you really think that it's a stretch to conclude that a gay judge who had the intention of marrying his male partner after he retired benefited from a ruling he made from the bench which might make such a marriage possible?

It's not a question of whether or not he allowed his personal interest to influence his decision or whether or not the decision can be supported by solid legal theory, case law, or the wording of the Constitution.

The point of recusal is to avoid any appearance of a conflict, so that a decision won't be tainted. It doesn't mean the judge admits he can't be impartial on the matter.

He should have recused himself in the same way judges recuse themselves from cases, the result of which could benefit them financially. In such cases the recusal doesn't signify that the judge believes he or she cannot possible rule against their own financial interests.

The fact that a credible argument can be made that this judge benefited personally from his decision is the very reason he should have recused himself. Whether or not you believe that he did benefit from the decision or that his decision was influenced by his interest is immaterial.

2 Replies

@realjohnboy,

Obama is burnt toast.

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

Ware's analogy is flawed.

Walker rule on a matter that had a direct impact on his personal life.

The woman judge in his analogy would be ruling on a matter that may or may not have on her personal life.

There is a significant difference.

A judge recusing himself from a case which could affect the profitability of a company in which he has invested, is not the same thing as a judge who invests in companies, and might one day invest in the def/pltf company recusing himself from the same case.

If a woman judge was herself seeking legal relief in some matter which could be favorably impacted by her ruling in the "woman's legal relief" case before her, I would certainly expect her to recuse herself.

The potential for Walker's decision benefiting him personally was not hypothetical or speculative.

I would agree with Ware if the facts were simply that Walker is gay and didn't explicitly intend to marry another man when the case was heard.

0 Replies

@revelette,

I can list what I believe their high points were (e.g. Pawlenty strongly supporting Right to Work), but I expect that you will vociferously disagree, so why bother?

I just don't think you're really all that interested in what formed my opinion, particularly since it is clear that you believe all of the candidates to be 100% wrong about everything.

1 Reply

@realjohnboy,

These polls are meaningless.

He only leads Paul by 11 percentage points?

If I'm Ron Paul, I'm dancing in the street.

1 Reply

@Finn dAbuzz,

Finn dAbuzz wrote:

The fact that a credible argument can be made that this judge benefited personally from his decision is the very reason he should have recused himself.

Thank you for your comments. I am sticking by my belief that the original judge's "personal interest" in the outcome of the case should not have required his recusal or disclosure.
It appears that Judge Ware's decision will be appealed. It remains to be seen how that will be turn out. It could go either way.
In retrospect, I agree that Ware saying a female judge could have to recuse herself in any case involving women was a stretch. If the issue involved equal pay for equal work, the judge would likely not have a dog in the fight. Maybe the written opinion provided a better example. Maybe not.
Anyway, I threw this in because gay marriage is likely to become an issue in the 2012 election.
When I brought this up on non-A2K sites, I was asked how Prop 8 passed in CA in the 1st place. I (lamely) responded that CA, from what I heard, is more conservative then most us realize.

2 Replies

@realjohnboy,

We clearly disagree but will see what the next level of the judiciary believes.

Unfortunately decisions on recusal can be difficult because right off the bat someone might argue that a judge should recuse himself from a decision on recusal.

Having said this, such matters require a judicial decision and so we just have to trust that one judge will not allow his relationship with or respect for another judge to influence his decision...or we file an appeal.

Like it or not, judges are, by no means, objective machines. We live with the ultimate decision, but it doesn't make it right.

1 Reply

@Finn dAbuzz,

Your argument would carry more water if the proponents of Prop 8's ENTIRE CASE didn't revolve around the fact that, supposedly, EVERYONE'S marriages and everyone in society are affected by allowing gays to enjoy the same right to marry the person they love that everyone else does.

A straight judge has just as much interest in this case as a gay one; and if you disagree, you are disagreeing with the case the proponents of prop 8.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@realjohnboy,

More than a woman judge recusing herself from anything to do with women's claims, all heterosexual men could have a bias against homosexuals. If that's acceptable, why not gay men judges? Where does the issue of "conflict of interest" begin and end?

1 Reply

@Finn dAbuzz,

Finn dAbuzz wrote:

These polls are meaningless.
He only leads Paul by 11 percentage points?
If I'm Ron Paul, I'm dancing in the street.

I, a Dem, would agree about Paul. But he has been around for awhile and I think he has a certain level of support from the "anti-government" wing.
He will disappear, I suspect.

0 Replies

Replace Obama 2012!

Obama is economic idiot

0 Replies

@Finn dAbuzz,

Finn dAbuzz wrote:

Do you really think that it's a stretch to conclude that a gay judge who had the intention of marrying his male partner after he retired benefited from a ruling he made from the bench which might make such a marriage possible?

The court ruled there was no evidence to support that contention. Without evidence there is no there there Finn.

Quote:

It's not a question of whether or not he allowed his personal interest to influence his decision or whether or not the decision can be supported by solid legal theory, case law, or the wording of the Constitution.

What personal interest? Because you want to believe something doesn't make it so.

Quote:

The point of recusal is to avoid any appearance of a conflict, so that a decision won't be tainted. It doesn't mean the judge admits he can't be impartial on the matter.

Wrong. A perceived conflict by someone else is NOT reason for recusal. There has to be an actual conflict. Your argument means heterosexuals can't rule in divorce proceedings and a lot of other ridiculous assumptions.

Quote:

He should have recused himself in the same way judges recuse themselves from cases, the result of which could benefit them financially. In such cases the recusal doesn't signify that the judge believes he or she cannot possible rule against their own financial interests.

The fact that a credible argument can be made that this judge benefited personally from his decision is the very reason he should have recused himself. Whether or not you believe that he did benefit from the decision or that his decision was influenced by his interest is immaterial.

Because you think it is credible doesn't make it credible. The court rejected it as not being credible. Simply claiming someone has a bias is not evidence as far as the court is concerned.

The court said this..
"The sole fact that a federal judge shares the same circumstances or personal characteristics with other members of the general public, and that the judge could be affected by the outcome of a proceeding in the same way that other members of the general public would be affected, is not a basis for either recusal or disqualification,"

Your argument is non existent Finn. It's made up. It's complete BS. There is no other way to categorize your unsupported contention.

1 Reply

Another little tidbit on the disqualification of judges in California...

Quote:

California already is the only state with a law specifically including sexual orientation among the personal characteristics that may not be used to seek a judge's disqualification, although Ware did not cite it in Tuesday's ruling.

0 Replies

@Finn dAbuzz,

Quote:

I can list what I believe their high points were (e.g. Pawlenty strongly supporting Right to Work), but I expect that you will vociferously disagree, so why bother?

I actually agree that people should have the to decide if they want to belong to a union or not. However, I also agree that people should have the right to collective bargaining and belong to a union if they want to without paying any price for in regards to their employment. Freedom all around.

The Republican Nomination For President: The Race For The Race For The White House

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know