Let's hope they lose their ass in the 2006 congressional elections, too.
Waaaaaaaahhhhhhhhh.
Now we need at least one more SCOTUS nominee and we can beging to roll back the socialist state being imposed on us by liberal judges and congressmen.
That's what this guy does for a living. Wow, look how important he is. /sarcasm off
[Snicker]. A bit overwrought, aren't they?
Yes, it is. It is extreme exaggeration.
Proving once again that "D" is for Demagog.
The RATS just cannot adjust to not being in control.
Heh.
Once upon a time, the dims mainstream puddle stretched from horizon to horizon. Now it's down to a mere 25% -- and drying up fast.
Life is good!
Wading through the liberal sobs in this story....the author has indeed tripped over one truth..Ifd they had NOT filabustered the circuit court nominees..they could have successfully blocked the SCOTUS nominees...as usual, being Dems, they overreached..
Between that and Howard Dean running the Party into the ground in terms of Fundraising, I think that the Dims stand VERY little chance of winning much if anything in 06!
Happy day!
The article states"
It is no exaggeration to say that 10 years from now Americans may be living in a society with less privacy, less autonomy, less democracy (at least at the federal level) and less respect for science.
Maybe a better way of saying this is that Americans will be living in a scoiety that has more respect for the constitution, less rulings against the will of the people and congress because it differs from the "supreme" views of a nine appointed individuals and more freedom on state and local levels.
Less gun control and a weaker federal government = less autonomy?
I love all these DemoCRAP fortune tellers...
What the heck is meant by "less privacy?" And does "privacy" really mean?
Does he mean liberal Mayor 'Dumbass' Daley installing video cameras everywhere in Chicago?
I think he forgot to take his medication.
Overwrought much? Let me parse this sentence, as much as I can.
less privacy Abortion has been misconstrued as a privacy issue. It is not. It is a medical ethics issue, which the state can regulate like any drug or other medical procedure.
less autonomy Not sure about that one, possibly "right to die", if so see abortion.
less democracy Since the "Warren Court" of the 50's, the Supreme Court has become more and more something which it was never meant to be, an oligarchy. Alito will bring more democracy, not less. The "Alito Court" will likely force issues like abortion into the legislature, not the courts.
less respect for science Maybe. However, the left's hatred of science is probably greater than the religious right's hatred of The Theory of Evolution, which is only one theory. The left's rejection of the idea of "Truth" itself is much worse.
For instance:
Almost miraculously, the nomination of Harriet Miers presented the Democrats with one last chance to keep a centrist on the Supreme Court. [...]I thank Schumer and Leahy for doing the dirty work and ditching Miers. Alito is a godsend.Miers' fate was sealed when it became clear that neither Patrick Leahy nor Charles Schumer would vote for her in the Judiciary Committee, thus ending the possibility of a bipartisan defense against the fundamentalist barrage.
"Under the leadership of new Chief Justice John Roberts, the court almost certainly will take a sharp turn to the right "
I could never understand how upholding the Constitution is a 'sharp turn to the right'.
Unless, of course, they mean upholding the Constitution is the 'RIGHT' thing to do?
Ya think that's what they mean?
Nahhhh!