Vote Bush in '04: The Supreme Court is too imporant!

vanity | 1/29/04 | vanity

[votelife]

On thread after thread I see people talk about abandoning Bush over immigration or spending or gun control or some other issue. I feel many conservatives are missing the big picture. Look at the ages of these justices:

William H. Rehnquist, 80 John Paul Stevens, 84 Sandra Day O'Connor, Ariz., 74 Antonin Scalia, 68 DC Anthony M. Kennedy, 68 David H. Souter, 65 Clarence Thomas, 56 Ruth Bader Ginsburg, 71 Stephen G. Breyer, Mass. 66

Rehnquist wants to retire. O'Connor did LAST time (but I think she felt bad about telegraphing it). Stevens is 84. Eighty-four. At 71 Ginsburg is no spring chicken either.

Now add 4 more to the ages of all these justices. You think Stevens will stay until 88? Rehnquist till 84? With his bad back? O'Connor already wants to go.

Lots of important cases are decided 5-4. Need I remind you Bush Gore was 5-4. (I know part of it was 7-2)...

Freepers have been getting all over Bush for not being conservative enough. But remember, without a conservative court, almost any legislation or act by Bush can be overturned by an unelected robe.

Let's review some recent rulings by the 9th Circuit Court and the USSC: pledge unconstitutional constitutional right to sodomy in the interest of diversity, affirmative action constitutional right to partial birth abortion the CA recall is suspsended (later overturned)

Future courts will decide the following: 2nd amendment cases right to life cases affirmative action cases immigration cases war on terror cases

President Bush has done a great job on the war and judges in my opinion. He campaigned hard on judges in '02 and it helped Coleman, Chambliss, and Talent win. That made Daschle powerless (besides the filibuster). Without that, Estrada would have never gotten a vote. Of course when Hillary et all are bent on denying any minority conservative judge, it's still tough getting conservatives confirmed. But let's see how the American public reacts when the Dems want to filibuster a qualified SC nominee. I'm giving Bush the benefit of the doubt. He talked about activist judges in his SOTU speech. All indications are to a more conservative Senate in 2004, which means if Bush is elected, we'll get a better Supreme Court.

Rehnquist wants to retire, let's give him President Bush and a conservative Senate to confirm his replacement.

O'Connor wants to retire. Stevens needs to retire soon. Any other justice may want or need to retire. 4 more years is a long time.

Freepers, do we stand for we the people, or we the judges? Get active in '04. Call Congress about your significant issues. But when you vote in 2004, think about who you want to nominate Justices and who you want as the Commander in Chief.

President Bush has to be the front man on these judicial fights and he will get slaughtered in the mainstream press for these decisions. We need to let him now in clear terms that we strongly support his decision to put conservatives like Miguel Estrada and Charles Pickering on the court...

White House COMMENTS: 202-456-1111 SWITCHBOARD: 202-456-1414 FAX: 202-456-2461

Email the President: President George W. Bush: president@whitehouse.gov

Email the Vice President: Vice President Richard Cheney: vice.president@whitehouse.gov

Freepers, do we stand for we the people, or we the judges? Get active in '04. Call Congress about your significant issues. But when you vote in 2004, think about who you want to nominate Justices and who you want as the Commander in Chief.

"We will not tire, we will not falter, and we will not fail." President Bush, September 20, 2001 speech to Congress

[votelife]

"Being Hispanic for us means much more than having a surname," said New Jersey Rep. Bob Menendez, a member of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus. "It means having some relationship with the reality of what it is to live in this country as a Hispanic American."

[votelife]

White House
COMMENTS: 202-456-1111
SWITCHBOARD: 202-456-1414
FAX: 202-456-2461

Email the President:
president@whitehouse.gov

Email the Vice President:
vice.president@whitehouse.gov

[votelife]

This page has links to all of the Senate Judiciary Members:

http://judiciary.senate.gov/members.cfm

[EllaMinnow]

A big old "Bless your heart!" BUMP.

[sasafras]

yeah a vote for Bush means he'll appoint a liberal like his daddy. Bush Jr. and Sr. are afraid of the liberal elite and will cower to the will of left. No thanks - Bush is worse than a liberal and just one step ahead of Clinton. It is like comparing bad to worse.

[votelife]

Here's an old letter I sent to W:

Dear President Bush, With the Surpeme Court session getting ready to close, it may well be time for perhaps the most important domestic decision of your presidency: the appointment of a Supreme Court Justice(s). The main reason why I supported you in 2000 and why I wanted Daschle out of power in 02 (and 04) has to do with the courts. I want America courts to interpret law, not write law. During your presidential campaign you said Thomas and Scalia were your two model justices. Those are excellent models. The High Court needs more like them. Clarence Thomas recently said to students that the tough cases were when what he wanted to do was different from what the law said. And he goes by the law. This should be a model philosophy for our justices. Your father, President Bush lost his reelection campaign for 3 main reasosn, as far as I can see. 1. he broke the no new taxes pledge 2. David Souter 3. Clinton convinced people we were in a Bush recession (which we had already come out of by the time Clinton was getting sworn in)

I urge you to learn from all three of these: 1. on taxes, you're doing great. Awesome job on the tax cut. 2. good job so far on judicial appointments. I want to see more of a fight for Estrada, Owen, and Pickering, but I commend you on your nominations. 3. by staying engaged in the economic debate you'll serve yourself well

I have been thoroughly impressed with your handling of al Queida, Iraq, and terrorism. You have inspired confidence and have shown great leadership.

But I want to remind you that your Supreme Court pick(s) will be with us LONG after you have departed office. I urge you to avoid the tempation to find a "compromise" pick. Go for a Scalia or Thomas. Don't go for an O'Connor or Kennedy. To be specific, get someone who is pro-life. Roe v Wade is one of the worst court decisions I know of, and it's the perfect example of unrestrained judicial power.

I know the temptation will be tremendous on you to nominate a moderate. But remember who your true supporters are. I am not a important leader or politician. I am "simply" a citizen who has been an enthusiatic supporter of you. I am willing to accept compromise in many areas of government but I will watch your Court nomiantions extremely closely. What the Senate Dems are doing right now is disgusting, but as the President you have the bully pulpit to stop it. Democrats will back down if you turn up serious heat on them.

Moreover, I think public opinion is shifting towards the pro-life position. Dems will want you to nominate a moderate, but almost all will vote against you anyways. Pro-choice Repubs will likely still vote for you if you nominate a Scalia, after all, you campaigned on it. So Mr. President, I urge you to stick with your campaign statements and nominate justices who believe in judicial restraint, like Scalia and Thomas.

Happy Memorial Day and may God bless you and your family.

[votelife]

Being active in politics gets old. But, there is saying that says when good people do nothing, evil flourishes. Well, if we don't actively support Bush and his nominees, nobody will. I've been trying to spend much of mine time of FR simply bumping threads related to Estrada, abortion politics, Supreme Court etc. Hopefully many FR have been brought up to speed on the Estrada/filibuster issue. I have also tried to tie this issue into to some liberals wanting to filibuster the extension of the assault weapons bill. There are freepers who are pro-gun, but not pro-life. Showing those Freepers the importance of breaking the filibuster might help make them see the importance of breaking the filibuster.

I don't claim to know the best strategey to get Bush's nominations confirmed. Actually, it's called electing more conservatives to the US Senate. I do know that calls, emails, faxes, letters etc are crucial in making sure the GOP doesn't cave. They're also crucial in keeping pressure on the Dems.

This effort might last through the election. It might reach a certain point where we should spend 100% of our effort on Freeping our guys from the right. I'd say we'd reach that point once we know that there will be no SC retirements before the election, June of 2004. Until then, we need to keep the heat on the Dems, even if it seems pointless, useless, and a waste of time. This is not a one man job. If I do some, you do some and thousands of others do some, it makes a HUGE difference.

So in summation, the Court is too important to leave to the liberals!

[votelife]

Bush I also appointed Clarence Thomas...

[Blood of Tyrants]

A hate to be a cynic, but Bush hasn't stood up the the Rats about blocking judiciary appointments yet. What makes you think that he will in the future?

[cinFLA]

You will really show them! Vote Kerry/Kennedy and get REAL liberal judges!

[Hank Rearden]

One lame rationalization after another. Now we're back to judges.

Actions speak louder than words. I'm voting Libertarian.

[cinFLA]

PICKERING!

[Digger]

Now were using the last chance card. Remember the threshold was 50 pubbies, then it's 60, then it will be 70 due to the RINOs. It will NEVER occur with this "Two-Party Cartel" in control because the elites own them & conservativism isn't their choice. And when is GW going to back his nominees - from beginning to end - rather than waiting until the battle is over & stepping up with some one hour puff. We know what the dems will do according to those memos from the dem but YOUR republicans will NOT fight to expose them. Why? Because they are part of the problem - being owned by the elites.

[votelife]

For those of you who like to call liberal Senators:

For those of you who like to call Senators:

Sen. Mark Pryor (D-AR) 202-224-2353
Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) 202-224-4843
Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) 202-224-3553
Sen. Thomas Carper (D-DE) 202-224-2441
Sen. Bob Graham (D-FL) 202-224-3041
Sen. Bill Nelson (D-FL) 202-224-5274
Sen. Daniel Inouye (D-HI) 202-224-3934
Sen. Evan Bayh (D-IN) 202-224-5623
Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-LA) 202-224-5824
Sen. Max Baucus (D-MT) 202-224-2651
Sen. Ben Nelson (D-NE) 202-224-6551
Sen. Jeff Bingaman (D-NM) 202-224-5521
Sen. John Edwards (D-NC) 202-224-3154
Sen. Kent Conrad (D-ND) 202-224-2043
Sen. Byron Dorgan (D-ND) 202-224-2551
Sen. Ernest Hollings (D-SC) 202-224-6121
Sen. Tim Johnson (D-SD) 202-224-5842
Sen. Robert Byrd (D-WV) 202-224-3954

[WinOne4TheGipper]

Yes, HW did appoint Souter, but it was thought at the time that Souter would be moderate to conservative. And he also appointed Clarence Thomas.

[sasafras]

Its the end of the world as we know it and I feel fine -- If I elect a liberal by default so be it - I hope the RNC/GOP is listening because I am not alone. We'll see who flinches first.

[StoneColdGOP]

You're a hoot.

What do you think the Senate will do? Rubber stamp any appointment a Dem makes? (OK... yeah some)

They'll act like Republicans again if the president is a Dem.

Right now, look at the treatment given to Bush's judicial nominees. It will be NO DIFFERENT for a Supreme Court candidate.

[votelife]

I refuse to be a cynic. Too depressing. In 2002 Bush campaigned against judicial obstruction. This helped the GOP win the senate by electing Saxby, Coleman, Talent...We almost won SD but those Indian reservations...

In his SOTU speech Bush talked about activist judges and even alluded to a constitutional amendment re: gay marriage. Talk like this suggests that Bush is getting ready to take the fight to the liberals. That being said, we need to back him up.

[Dave Olson]

a vote for Bush means he'll appoint a liberal like his daddy...

His nominating people like Pickering and Estrada for federal judgeships says otherwise.