• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Jesse Jackson to Stand Trial for Civil Rights Violations

aps said:
LOL good one!





By saying, "As a black man," that's how I got that impression. It sounded like you were speaking "as a black man." Ahh, I should have known. I have a photographic memory, and my eyes did not fool me. (How could I ever doubt myself? ;))
Click to expand...

have you ever photgraphed yourself naked in the shower?
 
Jackson is a fraud and a crook.........He is a traitor to his own race and has made millions by using them for his nonetary gain....Is is nice to see someone like Judicial Watch go after this crook...........
 
Deegan said:
No, I'm not a black man, but I am endowed like one though.:lol:

LOL, seriously though, did I somehow give you that impression, I don't know how?:confused:
Click to expand...

Nice Avatar Deegan! :lol:

If it's the same "Judicial Watch" that I think I know, they have a syndicated radio show that is pretty interesting. They talk about issues that are pending before SCOTUS. They always seemed pretty fair about issues.

That said - I have mixed feelings about Jesse. He moved me to tears when I saw him in person a few years back - he's a great orator. He drives me crazy sometimes though, most recently for lining up with the religious right and the Fristians in the Terry Schiavo case.
 
Last edited:
hipsterdufus said:
Nice Avatar Deegan! :lol:

If it's the same "Judicial Watch" that I think I know, they have a syndicated radio show that is pretty interesting. They talk about issues that are pending before SCOTUS. They always seemed pretty fair about issues.

That said - I have mixed feelings about Jesse. He moved me to tears when I saw him in person a few years back - he's a great orator. He drives me crazy sometimes though, most recently for lining up with the religious right and the Fristians in the Terry Schiavo case.
Click to expand...

Jessie Jackson is nothing but an opportunist. Thats all. I really don't know if he gives a rats ass about anyone or not, but I do know that if an opportunity presents itself for him to get some news coverage, he is right up in the middle of it.
 
Stinger said:
Judicial Watch is not selective in who they go after, they have gone after conservatives too when they thought they were engaged in misbehavior. So you can't use that as an excuse.
Click to expand...

They are not so selective on who they go after as much as they are what issues they take up. They are no champion of civil rights and liberties. That said, I hope they nail Jesse Jackson.
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
They are not so selective on who they go after as much as they are what issues they take up.
Click to expand...

OK put it this, what party is involved doesn't matter to them.

They are no champion of civil rights and liberties. That said, I hope they nail Jesse Jackson.
Click to expand...

Actually they are, they strive to uphold the consitution and bill of rights.
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
Jessie Jackson is nothing but an opportunist. Thats all. I really don't know if he gives a rats ass about anyone or not, but I do know that if an opportunity presents itself for him to get some news coverage, he is right up in the middle of it.
Click to expand...

I still can't forget Jackson counseling Clinton on his sexual indiscretions and then we find out at the same time he is having and affair with his secretary and had a baby with her..........That has to be the height of hypocrisy.......Oh and please don't any of you liberals and Jackson supporters ask me for a link becasue if you did not hear about it when it happened then there is no hope for you........
 
Stinger said:
OK put it this, what party is involved doesn't matter to them.



Actually they are, they strive to uphold the consitution and bill of rights.
Click to expand...

You know after reading the cases they currently have under litigation, I am going to have to agree with you. Going by the cases they currently are litigating, they are pretty much in lock step with the philosophy of the ACLU.
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
You know after reading the cases they currently have under litigation, I am going to have to agree with you. Going by the cases they currently are litigating, they are pretty much in lock step with the philosophy of the ACLU.
Click to expand...

How so? For instance does the ACLU defend school prayer issues, on the side of the prayee? And the ACLU trys to focus on specific Bill of Rights issues while Judicial Watch has a much much broader scope of interest. For instance I don't recall the ACLU coming to the aid of women Clinton abused.
 
Stinger said:
How so? For instance does the ACLU defend school prayer issues, on the side of the prayee? And the ACLU trys to focus on specific Bill of Rights issues while Judicial Watch has a much much broader scope of interest. For instance I don't recall the ACLU coming to the aid of women Clinton abused.
Click to expand...

If that woman would have went to the ACLU, they would have came to her aid assuming it was a civil liberties violation. After the junkie Limbaugh had spent years demonizing the ACLU, they were the first to come to his aid when the government wanted his medical records.

On the issue of prayer in schools, since there is a constitutional separation of church and state, if you are attempting to use the government or a government entity to promote, endorse, or compel you religious beliefs, then no, the ACLU would not defend you. In fact, the ACLU would challenge that, and even with the conservative judiciary that we have, they always seem to win on that that issue.
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
If that woman would have went to the ACLU, they would have came to her aid assuming it was a civil liberties violation.
Click to expand...

Jone's lawsuit was preciesly that and the ACLU offered no help while Judical Watch did, quite the opposite in philosophy.

On the issue of prayer in schools, since there is a constitutional separation of church and state, if you are attempting to use the government or a government entity to promote, endorse, or compel you religious beliefs, then no, the ACLU would not defend you. In fact, the ACLU would challenge that, and even with the conservative judiciary that we have, they always seem to win on that that issue.
Click to expand...

Which is quite the opposite of Judical Watch which defends prayer in school.

So much for your claim they share the same philosophy.
 
Stinger said:
Jone's lawsuit was preciesly that and the ACLU offered no help while Judical Watch did, quite the opposite in philosophy.



Which is quite the opposite of Judical Watch which defends prayer in school.

So much for your claim they share the same philosophy.
Click to expand...

By and large they do. The only difference that I see is that Judicial Watch knows where its money comes in so they disregard the separation of church and state. Other than that, the two organizations take very similar cases.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom