Posted on 06/18/2008 8:05:26 PM PDT by Kaslin
Conservatives, seizing on the Supreme Court's ruling last week on Guantanamo detainees, want to turn the court into election fodder. I hope they succeed.
No issue in this campaign is as simultaneously neglected and important. And the opposite reactions of John McCain and Barack Obama to the decision underscore how much is at stake for the future of the court.
Obama hailed the ruling for showing that "a state can't just hold you for any reason without charging you and without giving you any kind of due process — that's the essence of who we are."
McCain was initially mild, saying only that the decision "obviously concerns me." By the next day, though, he was as over-the-top as Justice Antonin Scalia, who warned that the court's action "will almost certainly cause more Americans to be killed."
Legal reasoning — or ad copy for the Republican National Committee? In any event, McCain got the point. "One of the worst decisions in the history of this country," he thundered last Friday.
Worse, to take an example on which McCain and I differ but that illustrates the overheated nature of his reaction, than Roe v. Wade?
This reaction makes little sense from a man who has repeatedly vowed to shut down Guantanamo — on his first day in office, no less — and ship its remaining prisoners to Fort Leavenworth.
After all, the whole point of stashing the detainees at Guantanamo was to avoid giving them the rights that everyone acknowledged they would have on U.S. soil. So the McCain solution — sending them to Leavenworth — would create the very situation he now decries.
More important, the ruling will not have anywhere near the disastrous consequences forecast by the McScalias of the world.
(Excerpt) Read more at ibdeditorials.com ...
What are they smoking?
Good question
Mr “Gang of 14”, hardly.
Maybe so, maybe not, but imagine--if you can!--what the Supreme Court will be like--and what its decisions will be like--when a President Obama gets through with it, with a Democrat majority in the House of Representatives and a filibuster-proof Democrat majority in the Senate!
agree.
a hasty conclusion by some mcdole propagandist.
Howso? You really think he will nominate or fight for anyone that will overturn his signature legislation?
Memo to Mr. markus:
I don’t believe you.
A President McCain will have a Dem, probably hostile, controlled Senate.
He would be lucky to get moderate SC justices appointed.
In all probability, the Judiciary Committee will not allow the current balance to change toward the right.
McCain’s ‘choices’ will be from the short list the Dems give him to ‘choose’ from. Otherwise, he won’t get them through the nominating process.
We will lose ground in some areas with mcCain...but we will lose it in all areas with Obama, on every issue.
McCain is doing the nominating so the nominees may possibly be slightly to the right of Ginsberg but even that isn’t for sure.
To the right of Ginsburg-LOL.i know you’re kidding-someone to the right of that sawed off little commie bitch is still a left wing turd.
You believe... I believe... at this point in time, I doubt either of us can convince the other. My judgment of McCain’s past puts him on the same level as Obama, or close enough to be indistinguishable. This is mostly his fault. Crossing the aisle, trying to make that state fixed, dodging key votes where he would have had to commit, erratic records that swing him from C to F and back again by NRA or NRL, the list goes on.
And you know this?
Please..he will appoint smokin lefty elites or “moderates” that will eat crumbs out of their beards for the next 30 years. Anyone that trusts him on appointees is someone that would donate money to his campaign.
Like Souter?
Or Kennedy?
How will we feel when we see McCain and other "moderates" dealing away our gun rights, refusing to drill with $8 gas, giving tea and crumpets to some head chopper instead of drowning the rat bastid, giving Social Security cards to our new migrant workers now made legal, and on and on and on. I'm supposed to get a thrill up my leg with the choices McCain would make? I don't think so. And all this is assuming McCain wins!
I believe in Santa Claus...
How can any Reagan conservative have ANY confidence in McLame the RINO?
In so many ways, he's a revolutionary.
Not that different from McCain. That is the sad truth. There both one in the same.
The United States would never recover from an Obama Presidency with no Congressional restraints. This is not true of a McCain Presidency.
You have fallen into the same trap as Neville Chamberlain:
They are both horrible choices. McCain just the other day said he was proud to vote for the two biggest libs on the Supreme Court. How the hell you believe McCain would put a conservative in when he says he is proud for voting for an ACLU Attorney as a Chief Justice is beyond me.
McCain is a sellout at the very least.
I see by your tag line you are a party first person. The Republican party has sold out our nation. This is why I told them to go pound sand.
I am a conservative first, and really not a party type. The Republican party use to believe in the rule of law. However, that is no longer the case. Case and point the illegal immigration. What the hell has Bush or McCain done besides trying to give amnesty to a bunch of law breakers.
They may say the words of the oath, but IMHO, their intent will be to tear it down.
I'm very much aware of the shortcomings of George Bush and the Republicans.
Bush refused to enforce U.S. immigration laws--in violation of his oath of office and duties to the American people. He refused to halt illegal immigration or secure the borders. He absurdly increased entitlements to include prescription drugs. He spent more of the taxpayers' money than any President since Lyndon Johnson. He went out of his way to alienate his base support--notably ME!--which was contemptibly ridiculous!
However-- There is a HUGE difference between McCain and Obama--and between the Republican Party and the Democrat Party!
And to fail to recognize the dangers posed by Obama and the rest of the Radical Left, which has taken over the Democrat Party, is insanity!
As furious as I am with Bush and the Republicans, this fury is not enough to cloud my judgment of Obama and what his election would do to and mean for the United States.
An Obama Presidency would be devastating.
But of greater importance would the significance of his election as a bellweather.
For such a man to be even a serious contender for the Presidency is cause for alarm--because of what he would do to America--but, of greater importance, what his acceptability to the electorate means as a harbinger of the future.
I’d say the odds are 50-50. I fear his addiction to acting in a way that wins the NYT’s praise.
But 50-50 odds are still better than 0-100, as with O’bama.
Note that I have changed the tagline because of the influence of your message.
I am glad you acknowledged some of the flaws.
However, I do not agree the two parties are that divided. It seems like they only disagree on how much of anything.
BTW, new tag line is better.
“Supreme Court Under McCain Will Shift Right (Good, I hope so)”
People who write or believe this crap conveniently (purposefully) forget that the DEMOCRATS CONTROL THE SENATE!
IOW, their basic preise is so flawed as to be laughable.
He's hard to get a true reading on.
I don't think he's really a classical school follower of Karl and Frederich.
He's a neo-communist, though, without doubt. Africanist, feminist, Frantz Fanon-following.
Potentially catastrophic. The reason for the qualifier is his weakness of character, shown over and over again.
His revolution just might fail.
Nevertheless, very dangerous, and a sign of how far things have deteriorated.
The nominees that McCain will submit will be those approved by his chief judicial advisor, none other than the genius that convinced Bush(I) to nominate Souter, namely Warren Rudman, the ultimate RINO. We will see no conservative replacements for any conservative or liberal judges. In fact, most likely the court will move far to the left if one of the conservative justices retires or dies. Thankfully that is unlikely in the next 4 years, Scalia (please Lord) is not going to do either and the rest of the conservatives are younger.
There are four conservatives and four liberals, and one who straddles the fence. There are at least two Justices who have delayed their retirements just because they don’t want George W. Bush to choose their replacements. If Obama is elected they will immediately resign, because they will be assured that their places will be taken by someone just as liberal, or more so, than themselves.
You seem to be suffering from BDS as bad as any liberal. The President has done quite a lot for this country, you are just too blinded by the immigration fiasco that you can't see it. For one thing, illegal immigrants were not given amnesty, because the legislation didn't pass. The President didn't want blanket amnesty, anyway. He wanted some way to provide those who entered the country for legitimate work to be able to be tracked, with Guest Worker passes. The really bad parts of the Immigration legislation was brought to us by Congress. Much of what Republicans are complaining about was brought about by Congress. Why do you think they have lower job approval numbers than the President?
President Bush has worked hard to keep his tax cuts in place, he's worked hard to keep us from being attacked again, on our soil, and has succeeded. You might be angry with the President about the things he does with which you disagree, but you shouldn't paint his whole Presidency with a negative broad brush.
No it doesn't. It has 4 Conservatives, 4 Liberals, and Justice Kennedy. Kennedy is a Conservative or a Liberal depending on the case.
Or the time of the month...
I certainly hope so. I do not find either candidate appealing but who will appoint the next Supreme Court Judge is the deal breaker for me.
Obama, the candidate who claims to have been a be a constitutional law professor, suggested the following criteria for selecting judges:
"We need somebody who's got the heart, the empathy, to recognize what it's like to be a young teenage mom," and "The empathy to understand what it's like to be poor, or African-American, or gay, or disabled, or old. And that's the criteria by which I'm going to be selecting my judges."
Of Justice Alito, Obama once said:
"I've seen an extraordinarily consistent attitude on the part of Judge Alito that does not uphold the traditional role of the Supreme Court as a bastion of equality and justice for United States citizens."
Obama is advocating legislation from the bench based on emotion and empathy, not the Constitution. A constitutional law professor should better understand the role of the federal judiciary.
There is a particular constitutional law professor who would benefit from this informative introduction to the United States Federal Court System for Judges and Judicial Administrators in other countries.
The federal judiciary is a totally separate, self-governing branch of the government. The federal courts often are called the guardians of the Constitution because their rulings protect the rights and liberties guaranteed by the Constitution. Through fair and impartial judgments, they determine facts and interpret the law to resolve legal disputes. The courts do not make the laws. That is the responsibility of the Congress. Nor do the courts have the power to enforce the laws. That is the role of the President and the many executive branch departments and agencies. However, the judicial branch has the authority to interpret and decide the constitutionality of federal laws and to resolve other disputes over federal laws. Do you see any of Obama’s criteria in that description?
Thomas Sowell expressed it as well as it can be expressed when he said; there is nothing John McCain can say to cause me to vote for him but Obama can.
No way will it shift right under McCain!
The tax cuts were a good start, and the fact we have not been hit again is good. I even agreed and still agree about why we went into Iraq. I am glad we are there. I just do not like the way its being fought.
I am concerned about the Leadership he has failed to provide. The way he speaks tells me he is not confident what he is saying. I believe if you are confident in what you are saying (although it may be wrong), then its easier to say.
Here are some issues I have with Bush.
1) Borders
2) Language
3) Culture
4) Out of control Spending and growth of government (higher than FDR)
5) Signing McCain Kennedy
6) The No Child Left Behind Bill
7) Increase of entitlements
8) Expanding Medicare and Medicaid.
9) Embracing the globalist Move
10) Money to Africa
11) Now embraces the Environmental Movement
12) The Political Correctness regarding the War On Terror. For instance, not calling the bad guys terrorist instead of what they are.
I can go on, but I think you get the picture. Sorry not impressed with Bush at all. You can say I have buyers remorse.
It will shift as far right as the Democratic senate will let him.
I mean signing McCain Finegold not McCain Kennedy....
You wish you had voted for Gore or Kerry?
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.