Speakeasy forum: Does anyone remember?

They're not going to let a perceived attempt to influence them, influence them. They will rule on the constitutionality of the health care plan, period. Does your use of quotes mean you don't think the president's lawyers are really lawyers?

I have no guess or prediction on the outcome. Some cases are pretty easy to call -- I knew the Westboro Baptist Church would win its case, for example. This isn't as cut and dried to me. It takes a level of legal and constitutional expertise that I do not have.

They have to have permission to present anything to the Supreme Court. Not just anybody and argue in front of the Supreme Court.

Diana

North of the Border we refer to politicians as honourable...of course we also call them "members"

Mr. Ken Boshcoff (Thunder Bay—Rainy River, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to speak to the motion. My comments today will focus on the heart of the issue, ensuring that the government uses our taxpayer dollars to support Canadian industry.
(...)
All these cuts are hurting our regions and costing jobs for our citizens when there is no need to make the cuts. The money jar is full and overflowing, yet the Harper government continues in the heartless and shameful penny pinching.

An hon. member: You can't say "Harper".

Mr. Ken Boshcoff: Did I say that? I apologize immediately.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Andrew Scheer): Order, please. The member should refer to colleagues by their riding names or by their titles.

Mr. Ken Boshcoff: When I do something wrong, I appreciate the chastisement. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Wednesday is the best day to watch in Canada....they are all wired up from caucus meetings...I think they have an open bar also.

of the problem as it is the party they belong to...and belong they must or they won't get work. Over and over we get to see new blood enter the system and quickly blend in with the rest of them. I wouldn't mind seeing both major parties kicked out but don't think it will happen soon.

Supreme Court candidates are, in a sense, presidential appointees. The sitting president selects candidates for approval or rejection. A rejection just lets the president pick someone else until congress finally OKs them. It does seem that a president almost invariably will select candidates that he knows share his ideology. That really shouldn't matter when interpreting what the law actually is but we know that lawyers aren't always about how to adhere to law but how to get around it.

How about forum members? Are they included in those wishful thoughts of yours?

If the Court rules that there is nothing unconstitutional in the health care plan, will that stop the plan's opponents from calling it unconstitutional?

I'm betting "no."

would have silenced all of that poking and pointing. You don't make Law Review based on affirmative action, you make it on being at the top of your class. Clearly he got the marks, which should silence all this idiocy.

But if they were to grant that he got the marks, that would mean that a ni... coloured person was just as smart as the whites. Unthinkable.

Rob

Secondly, I don't find it at all hard to believe that some believe that and have trouble accepting that he got where he did on merit and not because of his skin color. Racism is still, unfortunately, alive and well.

I can't imagine what it has to do with the president's past service as editor of the Harvard Law Review.

Josh, some people might want to see his Harvard paperwork for another reason. With affirmative action, you imply that his black ancestry was the reason. O.K., there may have been people who got into Harvard for that reason, but why Obama specifically. There are many, many people of black ancestry who apply to get into Harvard or apply for aid once accepted.
Why was Obama successful as one of that large group? When you consider his previous conduct in school as a member of the "Choom Gang" and the resulting drug use and study habits, he would not seem to be a prime candidate for entry to Harvard under an affirmative action or "diversity" category. As I said, he would have been just one of a large group under the heading of "Black". What could have caused him to stand out and be selected, especially under the category of diversity?
However, if he identified himself as Kenyan, he would have been in a much smaller group under consideration under diversity, potential students and/or aid applicants with connections to another country.
I believe he was born in Hawaii, but back then when there was a lot of competition for entry or aid under a limited number of available slots, there could have been a powerful temptation to claim a Kenyan classification to qualify. I wouldn't think that there were a lot of those applying. Remember the politician who was recently in the news for claiming questionable Native American ancestry? Some people might wonder if something similar could happen to try to qualify for Harvard admission or aid. Josh, wouldn't it be best for Obama for release all of his Harvard paperwork, show that that was not the case, and rapidly end such rumors? It would be an easy thing to do and solve that situation.

Nothing I can do about that. I think that if there was anything untoward about his past at Harvard, that Harvard would have something to say about it.

The people hanging onto stuff like this need to adjust their priorities.