General fitness, health and nutrition · Public discussion

Roberts nominated chief justice

Started by Donovan Rebbechi · · Last activity · 21 posts · 610 views

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
General fitness, health and nutrition
Published
5 September 2005
Last activity
10 September 2005
Original author
Donovan Rebbechi
Posts
21
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
610
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–20 of 21
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. http://nytimes.com/2005/09/05/politics/politicsspecial1/05cnd-scotus.html

    --
    Donovan Rebbechi
    http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/

  2. Donovan Rebbechi said:

    http://nytimes.com/2005/09/05/politics/politicsspecial1/05cnd-scotus.html

    I was wondering if he would move Scalia up. That probably wouldn't be
    a good idea, though. Rehnquist may have been a strong conservative,
    but he got along with everyone, and he was good at getting everyone to
    work together. I don't think Scalia's personality is suited for that.
    Roberts seems like he might be able to do that, although I think that
    all the senior justices might resent a younger guy getting CJ.

  3. JMW said:
    Donovan Rebbechi said:

    http://nytimes.com/2005/09/05/politics/politicsspecial1/05cnd-scotus.html

    I was wondering if he would move Scalia up.

    Yeah, same. In fact I was expecting it. This would have started a hideous fight
    in the senate, and I think that could have cost the Dems a lot of political
    capital regardless of the outcome.

    I don't expect a whole lot of controversy with Roberts, he's actually a very
    unprovocative nomination. I think the Dems will look silly if they try too hard
    to fight this one. This is why the more politically savvy Democrat senators
    like Reid, Clinton and Leahy are all fairly low key about the whole thing so
    far. Of course I expect Senator Kennedy to blow a lot of smoke and look silly
    regardless, but then, it wouldn't be the first time that's happened.

    Cheers,
    --
    Donovan Rebbechi
    http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/

  4. On Mon, 05 Sep 2005 14:38:36 -0400, JMW <[email hidden]> wrote in
    misc.fitness.weights:

    Quoted message said:
    Donovan Rebbechi said:

    http://nytimes.com/2005/09/05/politics/politicsspecial1/05cnd-scotus.html

    I was wondering if he would move Scalia up. That probably wouldn't be
    a good idea, though. Rehnquist may have been a strong conservative,
    but he got along with everyone, and he was good at getting everyone to
    work together. I don't think Scalia's personality is suited for that.
    Roberts seems like he might be able to do that, although I think that
    all the senior justices might resent a younger guy getting CJ.

    You do know that Scalia and Ginsberg are the best friends, right?
    Polar opposites politically but great friends on a personal level.
    That has to say something for his personality.

  5. Donovan Rebbechi said:
    JMW said:
    Donovan Rebbechi said:

    http://nytimes.com/2005/09/05/politics/politicsspecial1/05cnd-scotus.html

    I was wondering if he would move Scalia up.

    Yeah, same. In fact I was expecting it. This would have started a hideous fight
    in the senate, and I think that could have cost the Dems a lot of political
    capital regardless of the outcome.

    I don't expect a whole lot of controversy with Roberts, he's actually a very
    unprovocative nomination. I think the Dems will look silly if they try too hard
    to fight this one. This is why the more politically savvy Democrat senators
    like Reid, Clinton and Leahy are all fairly low key about the whole thing so
    far. Of course I expect Senator Kennedy to blow a lot of smoke and look silly
    regardless, but then, it wouldn't be the first time that's happened.

    Teddy?! No!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    🙂

  6. Donovan Rebbechi said:

    http://nytimes.com/2005/09/05/politics/politicsspecial1/05cnd-scotus.html

    If it isn't a natural disaster impacting 100s of thousands of black
    Americans then Bush is All Over It. Rehnquist's body isn't even cold
    yet...

    --
    Is this thing on?

  7. Joe Humble said:
    Donovan Rebbechi said:

    http://nytimes.com/2005/09/05/politics/politicsspecial1/05cnd-scotus.html

    If it isn't a natural disaster impacting 100s of thousands of black
    Americans then Bush is All Over It. Rehnquist's body isn't even cold
    yet...

    You really think Bush decided that over the last few hours?

    That decision will have been made months ago. Bush just had to get up and
    announce it.

    Peter

  8. Donovan Rebbechi said:

    http://nytimes.com/2005/09/05/politics/politicsspecial1/05cnd-scotus.html

    Yeah, I heard.

    Dear Bush,

    Don't you think that the Chief Justice should be someone with some
    prior experience? Obviously, NOT!

    You have my condolences, Bush. But, will the other Justices ever get
    overy your snubb?

  9. How much can Roberts bench? What can he squat?

  10. Midtown Bob said:

    How much can Roberts bench? What can he squat?

    Google says 365lbs, 515lbs.

    but that might be a different guy...

    Peter

  11. Joe Humble said:
    Donovan Rebbechi said:

    http://nytimes.com/2005/09/05/politics/politicsspecial1/05cnd-scotus.html

    If it isn't a natural disaster impacting 100s of thousands of black
    Americans then Bush is All Over It.

    Oh, puleeze! That was almost as pathetic as your black Magic Marker
    underwear.

  12. "Midtown Bob" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    How much can Roberts bench? What can he squat?


    Bill hasn't posted here in ages......

  13. ATP* said:


    "Midtown Bob" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    How much can Roberts bench? What can he squat?

    Bill hasn't posted here in ages......

    Didn't he have a genetic limitation of 225?

  14. "JMW" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:
    ATP* said:


    "Midtown Bob" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    How much can Roberts bench? What can he squat?

    Bill hasn't posted here in ages......

    Didn't he have a genetic limitation of 225?

    Bodyweight, I thought that was. IIRC posting lifts was considered bad form
    at the time, but there may have been some discussion about his bench.

  15. Mr-Natural-Health said:
    Donovan Rebbechi said:

    http://nytimes.com/2005/09/05/politics/politicsspecial1/05cnd-scotus.html

    Yeah, I heard.

    Dear Bush,

    Don't you think that the Chief Justice should be someone with some
    prior experience? Obviously, NOT!

    You have my condolences, Bush. But, will the other Justices ever get
    overy your snubb?

    Apparently you're not aware that naming an outsider Chief Justice is,
    traditionally, the rule rather than the exception.

  16. "JMW" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:
    ATP* said:


    "Midtown Bob" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    How much can Roberts bench? What can he squat?

    Bill hasn't posted here in ages......

    Didn't he have a genetic limitation of 225?

    I couldn't find the original post, here is a later comment:

    "
    http://groups.google.com/group/misc.fitness.weights/browse_thread/thread/f7a20b5f0c8780db/779e12600cefd566?lnk=st&q=%22genetic+limit%22+group:misc.fitness.weights+author:bill+author:roberts&rnum=4&hl=en#779e12600cefd566

    Steve Kidwell said:

    Bill Roberts <[email hidden]> wrote:

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    On the other hand, it would be prime AOM material and if Rob Schuh
    was here, I know Steve would get the award for sure with this stuff.


    Bill, go back to doing something important like figuring out how your
    going to break your genetic limitations of a 225 lb. bench press max.

    Illogical, Steve. If my genetic limit under natural conditions were
    225 (which I think is a low number, I'd say 250 or 275) then the
    solution to that is a no-brainer. Good old Vitamin T is the solution. "

    IIRC he had access to that solution, not sure if he was using it.

  17. Mr-Natural-Health said:

    Don't you think that the Chief Justice should be someone with some
    prior experience? Obviously, NOT!

    He's got experience abusing the Federal Court
    System and violating Federal Law...

    Federal law clearly states that a judge "shall disqualify
    himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might
    reasonably be questioned." Obviously, neither bu$h nor
    Roberts follow or respect the rule of law, as they clearly
    ignored it.

    From:
    http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/09/06/149245

    "But on a key part of the case, whether there were rights
    under the Geneva convention under what we lawyers call common
    article three. It was a 2-1 decision with Roberts in the two
    and there being a concurrence by Williams saying that he
    believed that the Geneva Convention did provide certain
    fundamental rights to Guantanamo detainees. Now what's
    remarkable to me that case came down on July 19-- I'm sorry,
    the case came down on July 15. It was argued on April 7. On
    April 1, Judge Roberts met with Alberto Gonzales to discuss
    the question of his being nominated as a Supreme Court Justice.
    So a week before the case is argued, he's meeting with Alberto
    Gonzales. And over the course of that litigation, before it
    is decided, he’s met with really everybody in the oval office
    and the white house. He’s met with the president. He’s met
    with the vice president, he's met with various aides, counsel,
    etc., while the case is pending. Now it seems obvious that
    here he is counsel in the case didn't know anything about
    those meetings. He is sitting on a case that's central to
    this administration's claims for power in the so-called
    war on terror which is the application of the Geneva
    conventions. He's meeting with Alberto Gonzales, the very
    guy that actually is the architect of part much the policies
    of the Geneva conventions and yet, he says nothing to the
    lawyers for the Guantanamo detainees, nor does he actually
    recuse himself from the case. Because of the obvious
    appearance of impartiality. That is where it stands.
    And then we have taken some action since then."

    --

    Ever wonder who benefits from the 150 MILLION
    U.S. taxpayer dollars spent each DAY in Iraq?
    http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0223-08.htm
    http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?list=type&type=21

    "They are waging a campaign of murder and destruction. And
    there is no limit to the innocent lives they are willing to
    take... men with blind hatred and armed with lethal weapons
    who are capable of any atrocity... they respect no laws of
    warfare or morality."
    -bu$h describing his own war crimes in Iraq.
    http://www.robert-fisk.com/iraqwarvictims_mar2003.htm

    "Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things
    that matter." -- Martin Luther King Jr.

    "God told me to strike at al Qaeda and I struck them. And then
    he instructed me to strike at Saddam, which I did."
    -- George W. Bush

    "Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the
    will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the
    Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord."
    -- Adolf [censored]

    "Brutal and sadistic? By what girly-man standards? Compared
    to how Saddam treated his prisoners, a bit of humiliation was
    a walk in the park. AFAIK, No one died or even lost any blood."
    -Albert Nurick, a usenet kook, on the rape, torture and murder
    at bu$h's Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq.
    (http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0512-10.htm)

    George W. Bush: "Intelligence gathered by this and other
    governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues
    to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever
    devised." March 17, 2003.

    http://www.commondreams.org/
    http://www.truthout.org/
    http://counterpunch.org/
    http://thirdworldtraveler.com
    http://responsiblewealth.org/
    http://globalresearch.ca/
    http://www.wsws.org/

    "To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
    or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is
    not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
    to the American public."
    -- Theodore Roosevelt (1918)

    "You know, when bu$h said that he's against nation building,
    I didn't realize that he meant only the United States"
    -- Al Franken

    Don't let bu$h do to the United States what his very close
    friend and top campaign contributor, Ken Lay, did to Enron...

  18. ATP* said:
    JMW said:
    ATP* said:

    "Midtown Bob" <[email hidden]> wrote:
    > How much can Roberts bench? What can he squat?

    Bill hasn't posted here in ages......

    Didn't he have a genetic limitation of 225?

    I couldn't find the original post, here is a later comment:

    "
    http://groups.google.com/group/misc.fitness.weights/browse_thread/thread/f7a20b5f0c8780db/779e12600cefd566?lnk=st&q=%22genetic+limit%22+group:misc.fitness.weights+author:bill+author:roberts&rnum=4&hl=en#779e12600cefd566

    Steve Kidwell said:

    Bill Roberts <[email hidden]> wrote:

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    On the other hand, it would be prime AOM material and if Rob Schuh
    was here, I know Steve would get the award for sure with this stuff.


    Bill, go back to doing something important like figuring out how your
    going to break your genetic limitations of a 225 lb. bench press max.

    Illogical, Steve. If my genetic limit under natural conditions were
    225 (which I think is a low number, I'd say 250 or 275) then the
    solution to that is a no-brainer. Good old Vitamin T is the solution. "

    IIRC he had access to that solution, not sure if he was using it.

    Not that you could tell from looking at him.

  19. Pete said:

    Apparently you're not aware that naming an outsider Chief Justice is,
    traditionally, the rule rather than the exception.

    Then it is stupid, stupid, ... stupid!

  20. On 9 Sep 2005 02:33:34 -0700, "Mr-Natural-Health"
    <[email hidden]> wrote in
    misc.fitness.weights:

    Quoted message said:


    Pete said:

    Apparently you're not aware that naming an outsider Chief Justice is,
    traditionally, the rule rather than the exception.

    Then it is stupid, stupid, ... stupid!

    Why? It makes perfectly good sense to me.

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.