Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Judges Are No Reason to Vote for McCain
The Wall Street Journal ^ | 2008-07-17 | Bob Barr

Posted on 07/17/2008 10:28:15 AM PDT by 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.

(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...


TOPICS: Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2008; aclu; barr; bobbarr; bobbarrisanidiot; conservatives; election; electionpresident; elections; issues; judges; judicialnominees; judiciary; libertarians; liberty; mccain; mccainlist; mccaintruthfile; mcdemocrat; mcjudges; mcliberal; mcsocialism; obama; obamacans; obamacons; rino; rinovsrino; scotus; sideshowbob; smallgovernment; thirdparty
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 141-146 next last
To: Myrddin

They want Ron Paul.


41 posted on 07/17/2008 11:20:45 AM PDT by Perdogg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: upsdriver

.....That’s how we ended up with McCain in the first place....

No, you are wrong there. There were several candidates in the primary and McCain attractred the most voters. The vote was positive, not negative.

You have chosen to make yourself irrelevant in the Presidential election by not making the hard choice between the two real candidates. As Freeper friends, we can only hope reason pragmatically prevails.


42 posted on 07/17/2008 11:20:45 AM PDT by bert (K.E. N.P. +12 . Conservation? Let the NE Yankees freeze.... in the dark)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: rabscuttle385
"However, the Constitution sometimes requires decisions or action by judges – "judicial activism," if you will – to ensure the country's fundamental law is followed. Thus, for example, if government improperly restricts free speech – think the McCain-Feingold law's ban on issue ads – the courts have an obligation to void the law. The same goes for efforts by government to ban firearms ownership, as the Court ruled this term in striking down the District of Columbia gun ban."

That is an entirely specious argument. You can't justify the wholesale refusal of this current Supreme Court to obey the Constitution as a necessary thing in order to enforce the First or Second Amendments. Barr is simply trying to rationalize the abuse of power we've seen from this 5 vote majority. If Obama is elected, the aging abusers will retire and be replaced by young abusers of even worse character.

Yes, it would be nice if the Supreme Court activism were actually used to enforce the meaning of the Constitution, but historically, that is not what has happened. It has instead been used to undermine the Constitution.

43 posted on 07/17/2008 11:23:06 AM PDT by Brilliant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

Although I will not vote for Barr (Libertarians are weak on border and national security, and weak on illegal alienism), this article rings 100% true on McCain

Only the most delusion liberal GOPer believes that McCain would really appoint conservative justices.

Too many have bought the “If we dont vote for McCain, Obama wins” crap.

Point blank: You are not a conservative if you are voting McCain. Deal with it

The GOP is useless as a party if the only reason to vote for their candidate is that the DNC candidate is not as liberal


44 posted on 07/17/2008 11:24:36 AM PDT by UCFRoadWarrior (McObama....Over 300 Million Screwed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: rabscuttle385

Bob Barr is an ass and has as much chance of being elected President as I do.


45 posted on 07/17/2008 11:24:46 AM PDT by pgkdan (Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions - G.K. Chesterton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rabscuttle385

What gets me is those that fall blindly into formation behind McCain.

Why shouldn’t we voice our concerns? Why shouldn’t we light a fire under his feet?

We should keep the pressure on him. We need him to see and grasp the reality of just how low he’s polling with us. We need to make him nervous, worried, and fearful of a loss at our hands.

He must be made to feel forced to make public promises to support Conservative Core Values, promises we can hold him accountable to. That’s the goal. It’s not to just fall in line and give freely our support.

At this point, he doesn’t deserve our support, or our votes. Only when he makes a bond with his word, and nominates a truly superior Conservative to ride his coattails to a promotion, will he deserve what we have to offer him...our loyalty and votes.

Until that happens, he can go pound sand.


46 posted on 07/17/2008 11:24:59 AM PDT by papasmurf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mouse1
Judges are the reason to vote for McCain and I’ll give you two reasons 1st ammendment

He sure does like the First Amendment.
47 posted on 07/17/2008 11:26:52 AM PDT by mysterio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Perdogg
They want Ron Paul.

Morons.

48 posted on 07/17/2008 11:29:54 AM PDT by pgkdan (Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions - G.K. Chesterton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Williams
"And that tired line about McCain voting for Clinton’s appointments - 95 or more senators did so."

DUUUHHHH. And just what does that say about just about EVERY freaking Pubbie in the Senate at the time? These clowns are simply members of the two branches of the Demopublican party.

And could that explain why we're probably going to get BO as CEO of what will shortly become the largest national socialist operation in the world.

George Wallace got it right: "There isn't a dimes worth of difference between the Republicans and the Democrats."

Only now, thanks to the Demopublican INFLATION, it's up to 6 bucks or more.

A pox on BOTH their houses.

49 posted on 07/17/2008 11:30:25 AM PDT by Dick Bachert (VOT)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: wideawake

I used to respect Bob Barr, but he seems to be full of himself, much like a large-eared candidate from Chicago whose middle name is Hussein.

The way I see it, I can decide to vote for McCain for whatever reason I decide is important to me. I don’t need Bob Barr to tell me why my reason is not valid.


50 posted on 07/17/2008 11:31:40 AM PDT by Gumdrop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: UCFRoadWarrior
Too many have bought the “If we dont vote for McCain, Obama wins” crap.

OK Einstein...if we don't elect McCain who WILL win?

51 posted on 07/17/2008 11:32:05 AM PDT by pgkdan (Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions - G.K. Chesterton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: rabscuttle385
From what I've seen of McIdiot, he'd be more interested in "preserving the delicate balance" than he would be interested in tipping it back in our favor.

We lose a Ginsberg, we may end up with a Clinton under Johnnies watch...

52 posted on 07/17/2008 11:32:12 AM PDT by Dead Corpse (What would a free man do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mouse1

If the First and Second Amendments are your litmus test for POTUS, why the gibbering hell are you voting for “McCain-Feingold”/”Closer the gun show loophole”/”Saturday Night Special ban” McCain?


53 posted on 07/17/2008 11:33:39 AM PDT by Dead Corpse (What would a free man do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: mouse1
Judges are the reason to vote for McCain and I’ll give you two reasons

1st ammendment

2nd ammendment

Any questiions??

This is a joke, right? McCain? First Amendment? Did you ever here about McCain/Feingold one of the biggest affronts to the First Amenndment in our History? You know who the McCain who authored that bill is?

LOL

54 posted on 07/17/2008 11:34:59 AM PDT by Prokopton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: pgkdan
Interesting. Especially since your comments on this thread so far pretty much point out that you are an "ass" as well.

You'd think you'd want to vote for a fellow "ass".

Unless you like the Democrat mascot in which case continue to stump for Juan McAmnesty...

55 posted on 07/17/2008 11:35:33 AM PDT by Dead Corpse (What would a free man do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse

Why did Fred Thompson and Zell Miller vote for it and President Bush sign it into law?


56 posted on 07/17/2008 11:38:35 AM PDT by Perdogg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Prokopton

Who offered to cowrite it and who signed it into law?


57 posted on 07/17/2008 11:39:13 AM PDT by Perdogg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse

You Nancy one notes make me sick. Pull your head out of your arse and deal with the real world. You have 2 choices in November. McCain or Obama. Grow the hell up why don’t you?


58 posted on 07/17/2008 11:40:00 AM PDT by pgkdan (Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions - G.K. Chesterton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: Perdogg
Who offered to cowrite it and who signed it into law?

Does it have anything to do with McCain being someone who cannot be trusted on First Amendment issues?

59 posted on 07/17/2008 11:46:02 AM PDT by Prokopton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: Dick Bachert

It is common courtesy once a president’s picks have been cleared to let the president have the nominee. You control the supreme court nominees by controlling the presidency.


60 posted on 07/17/2008 11:48:30 AM PDT by Williams
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 141-146 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson