The Chief Executive appoints judges who are confirmed or rejected ... thereby dramatically influencing the social order via the rulings which result from the shading of the courts. Rudy has shown a proclivity for appointing liberal judges ... that is reality and to not address it in political debate is limiting in order to 'get past the social conservative issues for the nomination'. I'm not sure, but I think that's what pisses we conservatives off so much about Rudy and his apologists at FR. Rudy has strengths but he also has weaknesses that need to be aired.
And when I get ready to vote in the South Carolina primary, my concern for judicial nominations will be one of the things I will look for, though not number one for sure. So at least we can agree on this.
Rudy has strengths but he also has weaknesses that need to be aired.
Absolutely, as do each of the candidates. But surely you don't see what's been happening here on FR as any kind of rational airing?
As for our discussion of conservatism, social conservatism and libertarianism, it's all really pretty moot. The socials have an agenda of issues that are important to them, the conservatives have an almost completely different agenda. That is the basic debate, and it will certainly carry over throughout the primary season, which I suspect will be all but over by Feb 5 of next year. After that, I suspect (at least at this point, the social issues will not be a major factor in the race. But with 11 months left, there are 3 or 4 who can get the nod, though as of now, only one who can win for the Republicans.