McCain slams Obama, “activist judges” in judicial speech

Fox News ^ | May 6, 2008 | Mosheh Oinounou

[Red Steel]

Winston-Salem, NC — Sen. John McCain slammed his Democratic rivals’ judicial philosophy and railed against “activist judges” who show “little regard” for the Constitution and even “less interest” for the interests of the American people, during a speech today at Wake Forest University.

“Some federal judges operate by fiat, shrugging off generations of legal wisdom and precedent while expecting their own opinions to go unquestioned. Only their favorite precedents are to be considered “settled law,” and everything else is fair game,” McCain said, addressing more than 2,000 University students, staff and faculty at the college’s Wait Chapel, before turning his attention to the Democrats. “”Senators Obama and Clinton have very different ideas from my own. They are both lawyers themselves, and don’t seem to mind at all when fundamental questions of social policy are preemptively decided by judges instead of by the people and their elected representatives. Nor have they raised objections to the unfair treatment of judicial nominees.”

McCain focused much of his fire at the Democratic frontrunner and continued to paint Sen. Barack Obama as elitist and out of touch–rebuking the Illinois Senator for using “vague words” to justify judicial activism and maintaining standards that “proved too lofty” to vote to confirm the “brilliant, fair-minded” Chief Justice John Roberts.

“He went right along with the partisan crowd, and was among the 22 senators to vote against this highly qualified nominee,” McCain said, as he completed a two-day swing through the Tar Heel state partially meant to steal some attention from the Democrats competing in today’s primary. “Somehow, by Senator Obama’s standard, even Judge Roberts didn’t measure up. And neither did Justice Samuel Alito. Apparently, nobody quite fits the bill except for an elite group of activist judges, lawyers, and law professors who think they know wisdom when they

[Darren McCarty]

That's speculation. We might. We might not. I'll take might over won't, and Obama/Hillary Clinton will give us Breyer clones, all of which would be confirmed by a crappy senate.

When the choice given to us is "Might be good" vs "won't be good", I'll take my chances with the might, despite putting a bag over my head when I leave the polling booth.

I won't make the perfect the enemy of the sometimes good, when the other choice is "always bad." We got a Roberts, Thomas, and Alito vote out of McCain. That's more than I can say for the rest of the turkeys running.

[Darren McCarty]

McAmnesty opposed Judge Sanual Alito

He voted for Alito. Source is Senate.gov

Vote 1 - Cloture to break the fillibuster - passed 72-25 with 3 no votes.

McCain - Aye
Clinton - Nay
Obama - Nay

Vote 2 - Alito vote itself - passed 58-42
Same thing - McCain voted Aye, Clinton and Obama voted NAY

[Norman Bates]

The McCain List.
Common sense conservatism

[TBP]

We might. We might not. There is no reason to believe that McVain would appoint Alito-type justices, especially when he said he wouldn't, and even less reason to believe that the Dimmycrap Congress would confirm them if he did.

I previously posted the reasons why he won't. In short, putting justices of the kind we want on teh Courtt would threaten McVain's chief legislative achievements, which are a line of unconstitutional usurpations and abdications of duty.

[Dianna]

Hey, are you trying to get me to change my mind?

Thanks for thinking I'm reasonable enough that my mind might be changed. LOL!

[netmilsmom]

>>Thanks for thinking I’m reasonable enough that my mind might be changed. LOL! <<

Why wouldn’t I?
You’re a FReeper. We think. We are informed. Sometimes we get passionate but none of us are unreasonable. Truly. And even if we have a pet issue, I don’t think that any one of us is closed minded to other ways of thinking, even if we don’t agree.
That why most times we see people who agree to disagree.