More predictions
 

Its hard to say. I am not sure what the facts and law of the superduperprecedentoverturner's case is going to offer to let them get there.

More predictions
 

So as SAMmy said, wheres the independent counsel investigation?

More predictions
 

Dream on.

pass the Tignanello
 

Is this anything like a Supertuscan?

More predictions
 

If wishes were horses, beggars would ride

More predictions
 

These are the Senators whose seats are up in 2006. I'd guess that Chafee, DeWine and Santorum are the most vulnerable Republicans, though I haven't seen any polling yet. I'd love to see Frist and Lott go down, but that's just wishful thinking.

Has anyone announced an open seat? ETA: Sarbanes (D-MD), Dayton (D-MN), Corzine (D-NJ), Frist (R-TN), and Jeffords (I-VT) aren't running according to the DSCC

More predictions
 

It is not at all clear to me that Alito would actually vote to reverse Roe. He is not particularly radical.

Oh, the wailing and gnashing of teeth on this Board if that day comes! superduper!

S_A_M

eta: Nor does Alito seem to be a "results-oriented" judge. That is, he doesn't appear to start with a result in mind and reason backwards to justify it.

More predictions
 

5 or 6 retirees. Severals may retires. Heavily slanted to the Dems retiring. I don't offer bets I might lose.

More predictions
 

You could probably spend the rest of the evening here , going through likely scenarios.

Historically, I believe incumbent Presidents lose seats in mid term elections, particularly in their second term. I cannot believe there is any reason for that historical trend to differ this time, unless Bush can come up with some substantial accomplishments for himself and the Senate in the next six months, before they all leave to campaign.

More predictions
 

I'd guess that Stabenow, Conrad, Nelson (Bill) and Kohl are the most vulnerable Demos, although I haven't seen any polling yet. I'd love to see Hillary, Byrd and Feinstein go down, but that's just wishful thinking.

More predictions
 

That's what Scalia is for. Alito will just sign on to that one.

More predictions
 

It bears relevence to what the founder would have done at the time but does not bear relevance to what we should do today. In other words, the founding fathers would have not been very respectful of a muslims terrorists rights but I don't think that has much bearing on how we should treat these prisoners. Since they seemed OK with slavery (and thereby the torturing of African Americans after they tried to run away) then we should not turn to them when deciding what our standards should be.

However, I did find it ridiculous when someone tried to claim that the founding fathers would have been respectful of the rights of muslim terrorists. I think that is absurd.

My position never changed. You just weren't paying attention.

More predictions
 

Turning the SupCt to the right, continued success with constitutional democracy in Iraq, perhaps a successful attack on Iran's nucular facilities, real tax reform and an economy that continues to grow.

I'm with Hank, it is a 3 seat gain for the Republicans, at a minimum.

More predictions
 

2.

More predictions
 

Back in those days, the world viewed us as the terrorists. And we, of course, viewed the Indians as the terrorists.

The question being discussed was the attitude the founders would towards whether the government has limited powers when acting abroad or only at home. I was arguing that the founders fundamentally believed in a government of limited powers in all respects.

I agree that the founder's views were colored by an extremely deep racial bias that led them to view blacks as essentially not human and by attitudes toward women that led them to simply disregard women as having virtually no rights. Many but not all founders also had very different attitudes toward men of property tan toward men without property.

That doesn't change the idea that if you believe in a government of limited powers, which is one of the great gifts the founders made to our history, it is intellectually difficult to find a way to justify our government treating foreign persons as being without rights. The cases you will be led to rely on are cases like Korematsu, and even the people I know willing to defend Korematsu as representing the right constitutional outcome seem unwilling to defend the underlying acts at issue on a moral basis. (And, for those of us who are fans of limited government, Korematsu is a total disaster).

More predictions
 

Can he do those things in 6 months, and reverse his current poll numbers? I believe that is about how much time he has.

More predictions
 

If you insist on conflating segregation with a women's rights issue, you'll wind up on more ignore lists than even you can tolerate.

They are not analogous for an innumerable number of reasons you very well know.

Roe is unique. Abortion is unique. Nothing is analagous. Thus, the "superprecedent."

Hatemasters
 

This is just dumb. No one is a hate monger. These people do what they do for dollars. Politics is a business. The currency is dollars, and the chips are rube voters who are piled by crafting the best ideological pitch.

I think you believe Rove and Cheney actually care about an ideological revolution. I don't think they do. There is no "hate" - there is just methodical manipulation of voters to roll back New Deal policies to make a climate favorable to people who sign huge checks for people like Rove and Cheney.

"Hate" is an allegation the Left uses far too much in describiong politicians. Its wrong because it ascribes to those people a level of human feeling they don't have. Its business. Dems, Inc. v. GOP, Inc.

Hatemasters
 

Generally, yes.

But it is a funny kind of business because you measure your success not by money, but by power, and so they are all power mad. Which leads all politicians to play to any old hatemonger who will give them power.

More predictions
 

I think we balance rights all the time, even rights that are fundamental even though they are not specifically mentioned in the United States Constitution. And I think Roe is a case balancing the rights of the mother against those of the fetus.

Pulled pork
 

Perhaps Penske can have it both ways and enjoy pork yet still reject pork in solidarity with his co-Deists. Pork is a wonderful thing, anyone who denies enjoying pork when they can get it is lying or delusional, but everyone should have to pay for their own pork.

I think we should all join Penske in lobbying against publicly pork until pork ceases to be funded out of general revenues. All other pork is a-OK, of course.

BR(so is pulling the pork, natch)C

More predictions
 

All of them are done or in process, although tax reform needs more work.

More predictions
 

This is the clearest explanation of how the three branches actually, practically work that I have ever heard. Its also an explanation of how they should work. The Right has tried to disrupt that work by using an absurdist orginalist argument.

Originalists of just about all stripes are idiots. Conservatives and liberals may debate how far we stretch the words of the contract, but originalists are just plain flat out imbeciles. Ever argue a contract issue with a fool who tries to argue the "four corners" approach in the face of obviously changed circumstances? That's kind of how I view Scalia - an embarrassing absurdist (unfortunately not the Python/Naked Gun/Airplane sort).

More predictions
 

I was not commenting on any of that. I am just saying the founding fathers would probably have had no trouble treating brown, non christian terrorists in the way that we are. To invoke their name when critizising the way we deal with terrorists is absurd.

Pulled pork
 

I like bacon. I like sausage. I hate ham. I hate pork. I hate pulled pork tenderloin. I hate pork bbq. Where's that leave me?

Pulled pork
 

I-Hop

Hatemasters
 

They are not money mad. If they were only out for money they would never take a government job. They are also not hatemongers.

This exchange shows exactly why the left miscalulates and underestimates these people because they think they are just in it for the power, money or because they are vengeful. These people really believe that they are doing the right thing for the country. They have passed up much more lucrative jobs and careers to make the country a better place (at least what they think is a better place).

Until the left understands that these people really believe in what they are doing, they will always understimate them and the power of their message. The Democratics keep saying, well if we just improve our ground game, or we run better campaings, we will win. The Dems are losing the message game, because they really don't have a message and don't understand they are against people that have a message and really believe in it.

Hatemasters
 

I think irony and its cousin, sarcasm, are complete strangers to you.

Hatemasters
 

I think that applies to all fields. You have to actually love the game to make the really big bucks, and loving the game means covetting power and beating others.

Me, I just want the money. Hence the yearly "We can't say anything bad about your performance, but there's something amiss with you."

"Yeh, no shit. I don't want to be like you at all. But I want your fucking money."

I can't think of anything I want less than power. Why would you want to play reindeer games with urban twit Napoleons?

Hatemasters
 

Rubbish. Thats an after the fact cop-out.

Or maybe not. I didn't read your post in context or in full.

Or did I? Maybe this is a cop out for my lack of eye for your clever sarcasm.

Or maybe not.

Hatemasters
 

What message? "I want more money" is the only message I hear from GOP voters. If the Dems gave GOP voters more money, the Dems would win the election.

People don't give a rat's asshole what the govt does spo long as its stays the fuck away from them - particularly their pocketbooks.

More predictions
 

this is bullshit. Plessy was wrong. slavery was wrong, but the decision, in context was no less a precedent. For 50 plus years. And Roe could be argued to be just as wrong. If for some cosmic UMC reason the rights of the feti trump the rights of the mother, a lot of innocent feti have had their rights trampled.

Hatemasters
 

You make it sound like the GOP is just the business community and fiscal conservatives. I really, really, really, wish that were true. But the Republican party is much more than that. You add up the business community and fiscal conservatives and you can't even elect a dog catcher.

Bush, in those debates, kept preaching the same message over and over again. He may have not said it eloquently, but he kept repeating the same message and it really resonated with voters. The vast majority of voters say they though Kerry won the debates but most viewers liked Bush's message.

I have seen focus groups on this. It is amazing how he connected with voters in those debates.

Do you even know what the message was?

Hatemasters
 

I'll defer to your greater knowledge and concede. However, I'll offer this... have the next GOP Prez raise taxes and see if he gets a second term.

Hatemasters
 

"He forgot Poland" ?

More predictions
 

I agree with this. I think the balance is slightly off right now, I also think the arbiter of the test is wrong. It should be in the states. I am not for illegalising abortion, although I imagine in my scenario Utah might make it illegal.

Pulled pork
 

2.

More predictions
 

And NY, CA and MA would give them away for free - like those AOL CD-Roms.

It's beauty of the thing.

Hatemasters
 

the demos have no principles or moral clarity, so they don't understand it when others exhibit such traits. Its like being in the wilderness all your life and eating with your hands. If you then came to civilisation at the age of 45 and saw utensils, it would be muy confusing.

Hatemasters
 

And my guns.