TexasCHLforum.com

I am still trying to find a link to the article but have not had much luck. My wife called me to the living room this morning where she was watching the Clinton News Network (CNN) I think (why I don't know), and there was a story about possible Clinton Cabinet nominations. Some one asked her about BHO for the Supreme Court. She stated she has thought about it and might be a good idea.

If this indeed happens, the 2A will go right out the window.

I will continue to search for the link.

Anyone remember that book "Term Limits" by Vince Flynn?

"What if America's leaders were held accountable for their broken promises --
and made to pay for their corruption?"

(I am not advocating anyone start shooting Supreme Court Justices, Congressmen or Senators)

When judges rule that the meaning of the Constitution changes over time and with different circumstances, they no longer serve in the capacity the judiciary was established for -- as a balance to the Legislative and Executive. Their role was to provide a steadying influence and assurance that Government would work for society within the bounds of the Constitution. In a climate rife with judicial activism, it is time to revisit the notion of terms for Federal judges. Lifetime appointments allow for a lifetime of activism, which is something our Republic cannot afford.

That's all it is, a scary thought.

First of all, Obama would never do it, even if he could survive confirmation, which he can't, short of an unspeakable tragedy in the Senate. The job is far, far too limiting and poor paying.

Secondly, there is no upside for Hillary. There are many, many others she owes important jobs to, and she owes him nothing, or feels that way.

Thirdly, there are any number of far more qualified, and grateful, possibilities who could be confirmed.

The main disadvantage of our devotion to free speech is the large number of folks with blitherer's disease, a condition in which every thought that comes to the sufferer's brain rolls out their mouth without any filtering. It seems more prevalent in older females, and with modern communications can be easily inflicted on the rest of us without respite.

"WE" the people, have allowed our judiciary to become overreaching. The Constitution does not provide for any group except our legislatures, whether it be local, state or federal to create law. We have allowed Judges/Courts to create law by allowing the "Case Law" mindset to go unchallenged. If a single person or entity can arbitrarily change laws then our society as we knew it cannot survive. Now, that being said, I fully support our courts being able to determine if a law meets the standards contained in our Constitution as this helps to stem corrupt legislator's powers. At the Federal level there were created three distinct branches to balance each other's powers, however in the past few decades our legislative bodies have abdicated their responsibilities to the other two branches either through complacency, ignorance or both.

Man. I really need to throw my "soap box" away, for it will surely be my downfall. :)

I agree that he probably doesn't want it. There's so much more money to be had in speaking tours, writing and signing books, etc.

This has already been demonstrated by Hill and Bill.

RPBrown wrote:Some one asked [Hillary] about BHO for the Supreme Court. She stated she has thought about it and might be a good idea.

If this indeed happens, the 2A will go right out the window.

It doesn't have to be BHO. Gutting the 2nd Amendment will be a Democrat litmus test for any nominee. If Hillary is elected, the ball game is over.

RPBrown wrote:[S]he was watching the Clinton News Network (CNN).

Gee, and all this time I thought it was the Communist News Network. :-)

KLB wrote:

RPBrown wrote:[S]he was watching the Clinton News Network (CNN).

Gee, and all this time I thought it was the Communist News Network. :-)

The difference is what exactly?

KLB wrote:

RPBrown wrote:[S]he was watching the Clinton News Network (CNN).

Gee, and all this time I thought it was the Communist News Network. :-)

Won't happen because he'd have to release is college transcripts. That scam would be revealed.

KLB is spot on. If Hilary is elected, we are in deep with virtually no hope left for the SCOTUS. Trump may be an unknown quantity, but I trust him far more than any democrat. Please remember that in addition to Pres, we need to elect pro 2A supporters all the way down the ballot from Pres to city dog catcher!