Posted on 05/02/2009 7:00:09 AM PDT by StopBigGovt
The top nominees for the US Supreme Court are far-left leaning (no surprise there). Choosing Justice David Souter's replacement is an opportunity for Pres. Barack Obama, and his choice will be an eye-opener for main-stream Americans.
(Excerpt) Read more at big-government-in-your-wallet.com ...
How much further left can it go?
Souter delayed until Bush was gone on purpose IMHO.
Some gift to the USA by a "thoughtful moderate".....
.....He exposes himself as the flaming left radical he is.
Now the court will be HARD LEFT, not just left....sometimes. Obama will now be able to do whatever he wants and the hard left court will support the UN and "International Precedent" instead of enforcing the Constitution as it is written.
Nepotism runs deep in certain cultures. Look for for a new justice in $540.00 sneakers.
If Obama gets to appoint enough justices, it’ll be so far left, Ruth Bader Ginsburg will be considered a swing vote.
[...]
It is also unclear that a Justice Kagan would be an adequately independent check on executive excesses. She has argued in favor of greatly enhanced presidential control over the bureaucracy, which is concerning in light of President Obama’s unprecedented centralization of power in the White House.”
This should send chills down the spine of anyone who has an ounce of respect for the constitution and the rule of law. Zero is setting himself up to become an African strongman.
Main Street voters have blinders on. They don’t want to hear anything against the messiah.
Souter was already about as far left as you could go. I doubt if any of Obama's nominations shift the court at all. But what Obama's appointments wii accomplish is to replace all the leftist dinosaurs on the court with a bunch of young leftist. There were at least two dinosaurs on the court which would not have lasted through another Republican administration and the right has lost a HUGE opportunity to really move the court back to the Constitutional principles.
The American people will never know who Obama puts on the high court, for that is called “inside baseball” by the media. The people will have “faith” in Obama’s selection. In other words, the American people could never remember the name of Obama’s nominee, not that the name itself would mean anything. Whoever is chosen will vote exactly as Souter, for I dont’ recall Souter ever taking a conservative stand for at least the last sixteen years.
That’s the problem: the American people themselves have no respect for the Founding Fathers and the Constitution. Doesn’t George Washington rank ninth in popularity among the American presidents? And only that high because they have heard of his name
Souter is and has been a radical leftist, utterly uninterested in what the Constitution has to say about anything. Hussein will simply replace him with one of the same. Wanna know how stupid Bush the Elder was? He appointed Souter! Shrewd, huh? Another conservative Bush at the helm. Er, that is, lesser of two evils.
Though he seems low-key and uninspiring, Souter is a good actor: he fooled ol’ John Sununu, who claimed to be “in the know”.
Fobama will select a justice that legislates with empathy from the bench so we can just send the legislative branch home and allow ourselves to be ruled by a tribunal of nine in black robes (and a Supreme Leader to select the tribunal, of course).
We the People don't need to make no stinkin' laws!
Does anyone know why he wants to retire.
Obama will only be replacing a liberal for a liberal.
We can thank daddy Bush for the piece of garbage Souter and we can thank little Bush for Obama’s victory.
And Jeb dares show his face in national politics ...
Correction.....
.....We can thank the voters (both liberal and the "punish the republicans" crowd) and ACORN and McCain for Obama's "victory."
Little Bush was not running.
Well, it’s kind of pointless to blame Bush at this point, but he does bear a heavy responsibility. To take one instance, he was responsible for ousting Toomey and re-electing Arlen Specter. One very regretable side effect of that was that it also cost Rick Santorum his post, when Bush twisted his arm to support Specter.
And Bush is also responsible for refusing to back Bill Simon for Governor and then intervening to put Arnold in. Most Freepers have forgotten Simon, but he was a good man, and he only lost by 3 points—without the benefit of a party apparatus to do his fund raising.
And Bush is responsible for leaving the party basically leaderless, with no obvious candidate to succeed him. And he is responsible for leaving the RNC and the senate committee in charge of gangs of country clubbers who worked to get McCain nominated against the wishes of most Republican voters.
With a basically leaderless party that feels no obligation to the base, and is obviously ready to betray it again, it’s going to be very hard to straighten things out before the next election.
I don't deny that.
My point is that the bottom line is votes matter. The sooner we realize that, the better. We cannot go on re-electing RINOs in the primaries only to get the worse of two evils in the regular election because of the "punish the republicans" no-voters.
The time to kick the republican RINO a$$es is in the primaries. Not voting against the Kommunist RATS like Obama is just as bad as voting FOR them.
But you are right, Bush was devastating to Republican Party unity.
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.