The bottom line is that NO president, conservative or liberal, is going to KNOWINGLY appoint a Supreme Court justice with a philosophy that is totally opposite his own.
Roody can say whatever he wants, but why would he appoint anyone who he knows he doesn’t agree with? Would the ‘Rats believe a pro-life ‘Rat who promised to appiont pro-abortion justices?
Roody miscalculated some time ago when he and his advisors decided that conservatives would be willing to overlook the fact that he is a flaming liberal and just focus on terrorism. They didn’t seem to understand that there would be CONSERVATIVES in the race who were even stronger on terrorism (real border security) than Roody.
I totally agree with you. My only point was that those who say he indeed would appoint a "strict constructionist" should find little comfort in use of the term.
I believe Rudy has shown such extreme mis-judgment in prior appointments and associations, that he should never be allowed to set foot in the White House, let alone be master of the residence and country. Let's take another look at some of his prior hiring decisions, those who were prosecuted and/or resigned in the midst of scandal.
• Bernie Kerik
• Russell Harding
• Richard Roberts (Vernon Jordan's son-in-law)
• Alan Placa
• Michael Carey
• Louis Carbonetti
• Guy Velella
• Anthony Serra
• Anthony Schembri
• John Picciano
• Raul Russi
• Louis Gelormino
• Leonard Piccoli
• Leon Goldstein
Absolutely!
Rooty Toot ain't the only liberal who supports the war effort. Joe Lieberman supports the WOT and the battle for Iraq, but conservatives aren't about to nominate Independent Joe to be the GOP nominee. That Hollyweird liberal Dennis Miller also supports the WOT and while he may be a favorite with SOME FReeper`s, he's still a liberal!
To all the Rockefeller Republicans and conservative sell-outs --- Rudy Giuliani is not gonna be the GOP nominee for 2008.