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

To: nopardons

No they understand it but they want one thing and one thing only, THEIR OWN ACTIVIST COURT". I don't want a judge nominated because of his/her stance on one issue. That person may be ready and willing to overturn R v W but what about the hundreds of other issues he/she may decide?


40 posted on 07/06/2005 10:11:39 PM PDT by Texasforever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies ]


To: Texasforever
No, most of the people arguing over a Gonzales nomination ( which is NOT going to happen and was NOT going to happen, but more of that later ) for O'Connor's seat, haves NO idea how SCOTUS works at all.

And I am in full agreement with the second part of your post.

Now, on to the thing about Gonzales..........

We have spent ALL of President Bush's first term in office and the better part of the beginning of his second term, having vast swaths of his nominees FOR ANY POSITION, being stalled and/or crucified. It was hard enough to get Gonzales conformed to be the AG, so why would anyone, with more than 3 working brain cells, pull him out of that position, try to get him on the Supreme Court and then have to get someone new as AG passed on?

O'Connor will NOT be the last to have to be replaced...the president will have at least one more judge to place there, if not two; perhaps even three. The man isn't an idiot and only a mordant idiot, would relish an extra blood on the floor fight with the damned Dems,by nominating Gonzales and then a new AG!

45 posted on 07/06/2005 10:23:56 PM PDT by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | 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