Judges Are No Reason to Vote for McCain

The Wall Street Journal ^ | 2008-07-17 | Bob Barr

[rabscuttle385]

The judiciary is becoming an important election issue. John McCain is warning conservatives that control of today's finely balanced Supreme Court depends on his election. Unfortunately, his jurisprudence is likely to be anything but conservative.

The idea of a "living Constitution" long has been popular on the political left. Conservatives routinely dismiss such result-oriented justice, denouncing "judicial activism" and proclaiming their fidelity to "original intent." However, many Republicans, like Mr. McCain, are just as result-oriented as their Democratic opponents. They only disagree over the result desired.

Judge-made rights are wrong because there is no constitutional warrant behind them. The Constitution leaves most decisions up to the normal political process.

[newfreep]

The point I'm making is the senate will be overwhelming controlled by a rat majority. mccain will not be able to get a conservative judge approved. At best, we will have more souters which are just as bad as ruth buzzi ginsberg.

Whoever wins, America is screwed. Both mccain and nobama will give us more liberal activist judges and open borders/amnesty...just to name a few isues.

[Williams]

I believe Roberts and Alito were both overwhelmingly approved by democrat Congresses. There are many factors, including the strength of public good will toward a (hopefully) McCain presidency at he time. I wuld like to see the Congress not be so dem, if only the GOP will get its energy politics in gear.

[newfreep]

The Senate approves judges and the pubs had a majority. The rats control senate now and will increase their numbers in November.

Even with juan "amnesty" mccain, we're screwed.

Ciao!

[newfreep]

Public good will affecting the dem-RATS? You gotta be joking!

[supercat]

3. NOTHING in the Constitution prevents a firmly controlled Democrat congress and a President Hussein Obama from deciding to expand the size of the Supreme Court from 9 to 11 or 13 justices, then loading it with liberal hacks...thus nullifying the firm conservatives put on the court by President Bush 43.

People often forget one very significant check on the government's power: to be effective, it must be seen as legitimate. Today, the Supreme Court has an aura of legitimacy far beyond anything it deserves. Were Obama to pack the court with Bill and Hillary, Gore and Kerry, that could prompt a crisis of legitimacy(*); since I don't see any path to lawful government without first going through a crisis of legitimacy, having the Democrats trigger the crisis would probably not be a bad thing.

(*) A crisis of legitimacy is the turning point between civil war and lawful government; the more widely the government is seen to be illegitimate, the greater the likelihood of restoring lawful government without civil war.

[dcwusmc]

I notice that you didn’t actually address the issue at hand. As to whether or not you are a liberal, well, let your conscience be your guide. You do appear to be an opportunist, however, since you yet won’t admit of any principles you will not violate merely for the sake of having someone as POTUS who wears that magical (R) after his name, no matter what he does or does not stand for. And if what you want to offer us is “reality,” make mine vanilla.