Replies

I view the Miers nomination as Bush rewarding a loyal hardworking supporter. Now tell me thats not done in politics ! Also there is a long history of putting supporters on the USSC.

True enough. But the Left has placed very persuasive scholars on that Court and stacked so many precedents that wee cannot afford to place another weak-minded justice within their reach (Souter, Kennedy). If we succeed in remaking the Court, it will again become routine for presidents to place cronies on the Court if they are not from their home state.

When you have the enemy down stomp him !

We did. And unless she serves as an unswerving originalist judge on the federal bench first, we won't have to worry about her again. In fact, I think Miers should be appointed to the federal bench. I'd be happy to write my senators.

(It would unique to have someone on the USSC bench who doesn't think environmentalists are automatic saints & businessmen are automatically evil!)

I assume you mean the enviro-wacko business-hating justices like Rehnquist, Thomas, Scalia, Roberts and Alito?

The only way we can pull out the hammer & smash Roe Vs Wade is when we get 55-60 ironclad votes in the Senate.

We will get Alito after the Left fleeces its supporters of some cash. (That's a good thing in an election year.) And after we get one more justice, we won't have to worry.

But you can remain pure if you want and demand an all or nothing approach.

If they insist on a pro-abortion candidate, they know what a lot of their voters will do. Stay home. Or deliberately vote for a Dim to ensure that the GOP cannot win by stabbing them in the back by going pro-choice after leading us down the garden path for so many years. A pro-abortion nominee is one of the very few things that could make me personally consider voting for a Dim to deliberately defeat the pro-abortion GOP candidate. Where I live, Dims simply cannot be elected as true pro-choicers. And that's why. The only Dim elected statewide in the last decade was one who sponsored parental notification legislation and was soft on supporting abortion rights. And he's still on shaky ground and isn't trusted much.

I believe the GOP knows far better than you (or I) how to count pro-life votes. They would have dumped the pro-lifers long ago if it didn't mean an absolute disaster at the ballot box. I entertain no delusions that the GOP is loyal to any of its supporters. They aren't even particularly loyal to their big business interests who complain that they won't stay bought on a particular issue.

I think there are millions of very hard-nosed pro-lifers out there. You can go vote for any pro-abortion candidates you like. But I don't think you'll like the results: President Hillary.

Obviously you didn't read my post very well or you wouldn't have made this statement

"If they insist on a pro-abortion candidate, they know what a lot of their voters will do"

I only insist on fielding & supporting winning candidates. I am unconvinced there is any evidence their is enough pro-life support at the national level to do anymore then another coin-flip (ergo 2000 & 2004). In the midst of the war on terror and don't think we can afford another 'national walk-about-in-dream-land' with another democrat administration. The potential for another terror attack increases since I guarantee that a democrat administration will be all conciliation & kisses. National security will go back to be something to be 'snickered' when mentioned by the democrat administration beautiful people.