He's warming up.
who needs to expect when we have PROOF that he leans to the right
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1558659/posts
We'll see.
The only radicals I know are left wing nuts. Take a look at that Vermont judge....60 days for raping a 4 year old for years!! And the state wants treatment for HIM!!!! President Bush is a conservative, it is his right to nominate whoever he pleases.
Two comments: He will likely move them more towards literacy than conservatism; and it would be surprising if he does not substantially improve the quality of written decisions - O'Connor was horribly convoluted and vague where she didn't need to be.
NOOOOOOOOOOO ... SAY IT AIN'T SO !!!
1 a : exceeding usual limits : SURPASSING b : extending or lying beyond the limits of ordinary experience c in Kantian philosophy : being beyond the limits of all possible experience and knowledge 2 : being beyond comprehension 3 : transcending the universe or material existence
So abortion is beyond comprehension according to The Washington Times? Wow, what an admission.
Ya reckon?
One would certainly hope so, but one never knows. That is what makes life intersting.
Advice to our liberal friends:
Invite a strict constructionist to lunch. Giving up your obsession with the ACLU will give you new confidence (and new brain cells).
Actually, the court won't be moved to the right overwhelmingly. Too many conservatives think that Sandra Day O'Conner was a clone of Ruth Bader Ginsburg. O'Conner wasn't the worst of them. She did oppose government takeover of private property, for example.
It's the next vacancy that will really decide the future of the Court. Let's hope it happens while Bush is still in office and the GOP still controls the Senate.
Nah....I think he'll move them more to the CONSTITUTION....which is WHERE they SHOULD BE!!! sheesh.
I do too.
Roe v Wade will soon be re-visited and found defectively unconstitutional IF Justice Kennedy can be counted on to ignore European Law.
Thank you GH-NWO Bush for that AND ensuring Bubba Clinton's election with your sham campaign in '92.
While Alito is probably an improvement over many who are already on the court, to include O'Conner, I think he showed far too much deference to precedence, the precious stare decisis, at the Supreme Court level.
If they're killing people, and precedent says it's OK, and even if it's been ruled OK a thousand times or more by previous Supreme Courts, it is still wrong, and such a precedent deserves no credence whatsoever and should be immediately overturned.