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

To: ForGod'sSake
Sometimes small steps are better than overstepping; cowardly I admit, but probably more practical. Californy is not ready for a Tom McClintock(God bless him). Not yet.

Sorry, but it was a moral compromise for any Christian to vote for Arnold. Truth doesn't change and I vote according to moral truth, not according to what benefits a certain candidate may reap in the future. As a Christian I am to vote for the RIGHT candidate and leave the future up to God. I NEVER vote for secular humanists - I don't care what party they belong to. John Jay said we should vote ONLY for Christians - I follow that advice and believe in it. Arnold is pro-abort and pro-gay - abominations in my bible.

Not to mention, unconstitutional. And, what would you have Pubbies do? Most of these judges are appointed for life and it's virtually impossible to impeach the scoundrels. And the Daschle/Leahy cartel won't allow any real conservative judicial appointees to even get an up or down vote. I'll give the Pubbies credit for trying, but it's a formidable enemy we're up against; the tactics may appear less than honorable....I dunno.

They can (1) impeach bad judges, (2) use the Exclusion Clause in the Constitution to limit court power. They have done neither. They are either spineless jellyfish or unprincipled leaders - either way they are worthless.

202 posted on 10/16/2003 10:28:35 AM PDT by exmarine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 201 | View Replies ]


To: exmarine
Sorry, but it was a moral compromise for any Christian to vote for Arnold.

Agreed, but I would submit that life is full of compromises, even for believers. In fact, voting for McClintock would have been a compromise would it not; he's not perfect. Jesus wasn't running for governor of Californy. We do the best we can in a world in which the evil one runs amok.

They can (1) impeach bad judges, (2) use the Exclusion Clause in the Constitution to limit court power.

Good grief marine, they can't even get their own judges approved. You might submit they aren't fighting hard enough, but I personally don't know what else they could do. BTW, would you cite the exclusion clause you refer to?

FGS

206 posted on 10/16/2003 11:18:43 AM PDT by ForGod'sSake (ABCNNBCBS: An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 202 | View Replies ]

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