I’m no Romney lover but Freepers who threaten to stay home because there’s no difference between Romney and Obama would do well to remember that a Romney presidency gives us potential SCotUS justices like Kavanaugh and Clement while Obama will give us more Kagans and Sotomeyers.
As president, Mitt will nominate judges in the mold of Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Scalia, Thomas, and Alito.
That's encouraging. Let's hope he follows through.
The Mitt-Haters will be here soon enough to tell us all that there is no reason to expect Romney’s appointments to be better than Obama’s.
But you're singing his praises on FRee Republic.
You weren't posting that garbage six months ago, were you?
Besides, your argument fails. If the GOP gets a majority of the Senate, we ride it out and go forward with a Supreme Court of eight or seven justices, if need be, to fight off Barky's Communist jurists.
You think you'll know what sort of judges Romney will nominate. Well, guess what? He'll be thinking about his own fame, his own legacy -- not your ideas about whom to nominate.
My own guess is, he'll nominate Souters so we can institutionalize a "gay seat" on the Supreme Court, just like there is now a "black seat" and a "wise Latina seat" and a "Communist lesbian" seats and a "Jewish seat" -- oh, wait, make that two "Jewish seats".
One way to bypass the Mitt gag factor is to ask yourself-—who would you rather have as FL-—a stay at home mom who raised five kids-—or snarling vacation-obsessed Michelle?
Alright, I’ll bite.
A Romney presidency gives us no such thing. This article is smoke up people’s arses.
Romney’s record is firmly on the side of judicial activism.
http://www.teaparty.org/article.php?id=2340
http://poorrichardsnews.com/post/6634402544/mitt-romney-is-a-liberal-part-2-romney-appointed
Come on man........ it’s Reuters! Seriously.