Posted on 10/07/2005 3:34:03 AM PDT by pyoursu
Having a law degree from one of those unsavory Universities without pedigree, I find myself elated over the pick of a person of like stature.
Being a Regan Democrat, who switched parties because of the social issues of our times, I am somewhat concerned about the IDEOLOGLY of Bush's latest nomination to the Supreme Court. I am not willing to subscribe to some vague concept about literal interpretation of the constitution, because I truly believe that abortion is the paramount issue of our times. (This is not to say that it is the only issue of our times but it is far ahead of whatever is in second place.)
How can that be? Its not about the right of privacy, its about individual rights. As has been said, "As long as one person can be enslaved, we are all in danger of being enslave" As long as any person's life remains unprotected everyone's life is at risk
contrary to contemporary thought, My belief does arise out of a belief or faith in god or religion but more from an instinct for self-preservation. After all, that is the rational for entering into such an agreement, such as the constitution.
What I find most disconcerting about Bush's nomination is denial of ideology in the selection. Politics = Ideology. After all, didn't we win the election, did not our ideology prevail?
But there are some abortion supporters in the republican party. These, I would surmise, are persons willing to compromise their abortion position in favor of a more economic conservative position on other issues. While largely liberal on economic issues, I find myself willing to compromise on these issues to accomplish the social conservative agenda. In a nutshell, if "they" are no longer willing to compromise, I, likewise will go my own way.
Back to the President's newest nomination. Am I happy with it. Quite Frankly, I don't know. Do I understand why Bush nominated a stealth candidate, yes. There are those within the Republican party who are liberal when it comes to social issues and would undermine any attempt to appoint a socially conservative person to the supreme court.
Will the social conservative members of the party be disappointed if she turns out to be another Sandra Day O’Connor, you bet. Will the economic conservatives, likewise, be disappointed, you can count on it. Why, because I and others, disappointed, like me will no longer have a stake in the Republican Party and it will be back to business as usual under the liberal agenda.
Do I trust Bush's judgment in this matter? Do I have a choice? If we do not win this time on both the social and economic issues important to all republicans, that were so long in coming, the party's over, I personally, and believe other social conservative, will look for another alternative.
I am at the point in this information gathering process where I would be OVERJOYED if she turned out to be another Sandra Day O'Connor.
I wouldn't quite call the "abortion supporters," but of the names being thrown out for 2008 candidates, 2 are pro-choice, Rice and Guilliani.
Exactly. At this point, we should just cut our losses and hope for the best.
Sure hope Bush saved that 'short-list'.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.