Bob Brinker Free Discussion Site 59,820+
- Moe_Berg
- Moe_Berg
- iamacamera
- Moe_Berg
- Moe_Berg
- Marteau89
- iamacamera
- JeffChristy
- Marteau89
- iamacamera
This archived discussion is "read only".
For the corresponding "live" discussions, post in the active topic forum here.
« Previous 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 Next »
» Moe_Berg - Re: Bob amazingly misinformed
In response to Bob amazingly misinformed posted by Marteau89:I got upset to the point where I shut off the program when I heard Bob spreading lies about a so called "right wing" Supreme Court.
The Justices who voted for seizing private property this past week were all Left wingers - John Paul Stevens wrote the opinion. He was joined by Justices Anthony Kennedy, David H. Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen G. Breyer. These judges are abetting those who seek to bring this country down by distorting and "creatively interpreting" the constitution and law through the doubespeak made popular in George Orwell's book "1984". They totally disgraced themselves and the court in my opinion. Seizing private property has historically been a left wing tactic, not a right wing tactic. Socialism (the left) is where government owns a country's means of production (ie. central planning, failed Soviet Union and Cuba economies, stagnent EU country economies).
With this decision and evil minded people holding future power, how far is our country from a situation similar to that now in Zimbabwe where the communist leader Mugabe has ruined the country by seizing sucessful producing farms and most other private property and businesses.
We now truly have a dictatorship by the judiciary and our country and its' citizens are in mortal danger.
Bob is so ignorant and naive when it comes to politics - he'd do better to keep his dopy mouth shut and stick to investments and economics where he is knowledgable. More and more, Bob reminds me of the blabbering ignorant Hollywood actors who periodically pretend to be geopolitical experts in public.
-- posted by Moe_Berg
» Moe_Berg - Re: Re: Re: Bob amazingly misinformed
In response to Re: Re: Bob amazingly misinformed posted by Kirk:It does not necessarily follow that those who have conservative views believe that the “Bible is the True Word of God”. One can have respect for the values expressed in particular religions (ie. the Judeo Christian values) without being religious and/or having such a belief as you describe.
It would surprise me if Disney-ABC Corporation dictates particular political views by pulling Bob's on air strings. No - I believe that is a specialty skill of those who gleefully create and present slanted 'news' on the increasingly unpopular morning TV shows and evening 'news' programs and on the alphabet chennels and cable network owned channels. Instead, I see Bob as honest, but uniformed and naive. I think he truly believes he is 'independant'.
I agree that his program has become much less interesting than the period when the market kept rising 1982-2000. But you must agree that Bob definately has a soothing voice.
Yes - the good old days are just a memory now!
-- posted by Moe_Berg
» iamacamera - Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Bob amazingly misinformed
In response to Re: Re: Re: Re: Bob amazingly misinformed posted by Kirk:What a classic Bob segue. He said in his monologue that 2 of the judges in the majority were Republican appointments. As if that is what he meant yesterday. Bob showed 2 things:
1. Same old Bob - never admit you were wrong.
2. He has someone reading this board.
-- posted by iamacamera
» Moe_Berg - Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Bob amazingly misinformed
In response to Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Bob amazingly misinformed posted by iamacamera:That two justices (Stevens and Kennedy) were appointed by Republican presidents shows nothing in my opinion.
Like far left ACLU Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Justice Kennedy has no problem these days basing his decisions on international laws and the laws of foreign countries he deems appropriate, despite swearing to uphold the U.S. constitution. How soon will it be until he will quote laws of Zimbabwe to support court decisions. For this reason alone, these two Justices are in my opinion a clear and present danger to our remaing freedoms and they should be impeached in my opinion. I see no politicians on the horizon who have the guts to press such an effort. I guess we'll all have to endure damage from them usnil they pass naturally (the sooner the better!).
We can only hope that this president appoints replacement justices who will uphold the U.S. Constitution as it was written and originally indended. We can only pressure our Senators to eliminate rules that make possible Senate committee obstruction of an up-or-down vote on such important appointments will be eliminated.
-- posted by Moe_Berg
» Moe_Berg - Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Bob amazingly misinformed
In response to Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Bob amazingly misinformed posted by iamacamera:Bob's revisionist commments on today's program at about 5:15PM EDT (2:15PM PDT) totally support your post.
-- posted by Moe_Berg
» Marteau89 - Today's caller re Supreme Court
A caller suggested today that we all write our Congressmen and recommend a constitutional amendment to overturn the Supreme's decision. Bob thought that would be great. However, another suggestion would be to ensure that the next two or three appointments to the Court be of a like who would support private property rights and who could, eventually, revisit the Supreme's decision.-- posted by Marteau89
» iamacamera - Re: Today's caller re Supreme Court
In response to Today's caller re Supreme Court posted by Marteau89:Marteau, I respectfully disagree.
All future appointmentees should agree to follow the plain laguage of the constitution. That is all that is required.
-- posted by iamacamera
» JeffChristy - Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Bob amazingly misinformed
In response to Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Bob amazingly misinformed posted by iamacamera:Are you sure Bob said TWO of the judges in the majority were Republican appointees? I think it has to be three since it was a 5 to 4 decision. There are only two democrat appointees, Breyer and Ginsburg, on the court. Is Bob confused are am I wrong about this?
-- posted by JeffChristy
» Marteau89 - Private property and the Constitution
Amendment 5--"...nor be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."It seems that the issue revolves around what is considered "public use." I expect that most of Bob's listeners and most owners of private properties would agree that a new shopping center, hotel complex, or "Big-Box" retail store is not "public use." Justice Kennedy and four others thought otherwise. Watch your back pockets-and your local officials!
-- posted by Marteau89
» iamacamera - Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Bob amazingly misinformed
In response to Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Bob amazingly misinformed posted by JeffChristy:You are correct - Bob is confused. He singled out Kennedy and Souter for mention.
-- posted by iamacamera
« Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 Next »
Please follow the guidelines set forth in the Suite101 Posting Etiquette when adding to the discussion.