[Tempest]

"Since President Bush has had almost zero effect on the domestic abortion issue what difference does it make?"

Errr.... YEAH?!?! And as far as the judicial nominees go. It seems that your logic is backwards. It makes more sense for the President to push harder for a SC justice than to expend his influence on pissant circuit court judges.

But hey. If you like judicial activist that will target gun rights, freedom of speech, and innocent children so be it. I'm glad that you can equate such surrender to a clear conscience. . .

[Dead Corpse]

You mean like Judge Reggie in Washington DC? Bush appointee who upheld the DC Handgun Ban under the Collective Rights theory?

We need more Bush judges like him right?

[Abe Froman]

But hey. If you like judicial activist that will target gun rights, freedom of speech, and innocent children so be it. I'm glad that you can equate such surrender to a clear conscience.

OK, let's dissect these. George Bush supported and signed the CFR bill. He is not on the side of free (political, the most important kind) speech. Case closed.

Gun rights: President Bush pledged to sign the AWB if those that want to see it renewed can muster the political will to get it to his desk. If the Democrats manage to pull a rabbit out of their hat and actually get it done, will he do an about face? No way. Strike two.

Abortion: Bush has made his stance clear, which on its face seems promising. He signed the PBA ban which is good, but this only makes a difference in a tiny minority of cases. In actual practice he has used not his influence to push for any kind of legislative ban on abortion generally, and his lack of hard-line diligence on pushing his anti-abortion nominees does not bode well for what could happen when he nominates a SC judge on this life-and-death issue. If he can't get some lowly circuit judges confirmed how is he going to get a conservative SC judge appointed when the Democrats will really be screaming?