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

[NeoCaveman]

Thanks to: Trent "Spineless" Lott.

And Orrin "Neville Chamberlin" Hatch

[CMAC51]

There's always something that is "too important". I won't be sold a bill of goods anymore. This president is NOT a conservative.

If this president is not the next president the next president WILL be a Liberal.

[capitan_refugio]

The only judicial "appointments" the President can make are when the Senate is in recess, and such an appointment is good only for a limited term. The operative term is "nominate," as per your quotation. The same applies for other officers of the country.

Don't let your screen name influence your posts.

[StoneColdGOP]

Sorry, the Clinton years of hell all run together... And it's not like DOLE was much better!

[votelife]

if Bork had been confirmed instead of Kennedy, Roe would have been defeated...So it's not all Reagan, the Dem Senate Reagan had to deal with forced his hand.

[woerm]

ping

that's what has me disgusted,
there's no telling what else he would send to the SCOTUS
republican presidents appointed a majority of the current crew and they couldn't get 4 votes to even listen to Silveira and then turn around and ok CFR,

>>shrug<<

r

[Republican Red]

Thanks for the post.

I've about had it with Free Republic these past few weeks. Today was about as bad as I have seen it. Many so-called Republicans are willing to throw away their vote with the reason being "I'll show him". Yeah, go to DU and they'll make you an honorary member.

I strongly disagree with the President on certain issues. Spending is way out of control. However, I do NOT want to see a President Kerry. A recent Opinion Journal article highlighted that the dems are jumping on the Bush's spending at the same time calling on social programs that will dwarf anything Bush has planned. When this country gets attacked again, when are military is cut again, when we must go to the UN for a permission slip, when taxes are raised, when gay marriage is legalized, when abortion laws are strengthened will those same FReeper still be able to say "I'll show you".

Go ahead and bite off your collective noses to spite your collective long faces.

[WinOne4TheGipper]

George HW Bush gave us nothing. Every last one of the Perot voters knew the consequences of voting for Perot. They knew that they were giving the White House, the House, and the Senate to the Democrats. They had the choice between a moderate and a liberal. They chose they liberal. They gave us Whitewater and Monica. Clinton is nothing but their fault.

[StoneColdGOP]

They're both piles of manure.

Sellouts all.

[votelife]

lovin' it! Then say, "add 4 more years to those ages."

[gnarledmaw]

"I feel many conservatives are missing the big picture..."

Unfortunately, we do see the big picture. Bush is a socialist. The supreme court hoax was pulled on us the last time around and some arent going to fall for it again.

[WinOne4TheGipper]

None of them were nominated to the SCOTUS, but it is clearly Bush's intention that at least some of them do when the ones currently there croak or retire.

[EggsAckley]

Here's my analogy.

You're hungry, very hungry. You are offered two choices, a thin and watery soup, and a hamburger patty. But what you really want is a T-Bone steak. You really really want that.

Do you turn down the hamburger and go with the terrible soup, simply because the "meat" was not as good as what you wanted?

[longtermmemmory]

true, but would you rather have a good pick gone bad or a bad pick (lonni guenier) from the get go.

Scalia was a good pick.
Renquist was a good pick.
Thomas was a good pick.

[votelife]

1. what do you think Bush could have done to get Estrada confirmed?

2. assuming your strategy worked, how do you think it would have played in the media, ie would the trouble have been worth it for an appeals court nominee?

[CMAC51]

Oh, he'll nominate them, all right; his Federal judge picks (Estrada, Pickering, Rogers Brown, etc.) have been very impressive. But unless he can put the squeeze on Frist and Hatch to actually DO something about getting them confirmed, Leaky Leahy and Co. will make sure they never get confirmed.

The Republicans were highly exposed in the last Senatorial campaign and pulled it out thanks in large part to the judge issue. The Dems are highly exposed this time. If one or two of them fall because of the judge issue, the blockade will break whether the Repub's get 60 or not. The Dems know they are exposed again in '06.

Thune beating Daschle is tremendously important.

[NeoCaveman]

They had the choice between a moderate and a liberal.

Moderates and liberals a distinction without a difference.

If Cliton hadn't been a sleaze and a liar, what would have been the diffrence in the canidates?

[Kryptonite]

Two reasons to vote Bush - (1) the courts (2) the terrorists.

That's what it boils down to....

Good vanity!

[EggsAckley]

*Karmic hug sent*

[woerm]

and I'd be out there opposing that one too,

He doesn't think the 2nd ammendment 'confers' and individual right.

bzzzzzt

next..
r