Skip to comments.GOP delegates eye Nov. 4 high court effect
Posted on 09/07/2008 11:47:05 AM PDT by Clintonfatigued
Thanks W! proclaims the lapel button some delegates to the Republican convention are sporting this week in St. Paul.
Smiling from that button: Chief Justice John Roberts and Associate Justice Samuel Alito.
A group of conservative activists and GOP delegates got together in Minneapolis Tuesday on the sidelines of the convention to focus on the elections highest stakes as in the highest court in the land.
Elections do have consequences, said ex-senator Mike DeWine from Ohio, who was booted from his Senate seat in 2006.
Yes, it was a humdrum truism.
But the defeated DeWine himself exemplified the fact that the Republicans will likely be unable to stop Sen. Barack Obama, if he's elected president, from doing what President Bush did with his nominations of Roberts and Alito: staffing the high court with relatively young justices who reflect his views.
Still serving in 2043? Roberts is likely to serve until 2043 if he is on the high court as long as the senior justice, John Paul Stevens, 88, has been.
Justice Alito and Justice Roberts being on the Supreme Court are two entirely different people than would have been on the Supreme Court if the Democratic nominee (John Kerry) had won (in 2004), DeWine reminded his fellow Republicans. Very, very, very different.
If some conservatives are doubtful about McCain, then McCain pals such as DeWine can argue theres a compelling reason to vote for him.
The next president, whoever he is, will really determine where the United States Supreme Court is going in the next few decades. And more and more people understand that as I travel around, DeWine said.
(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.msn.com ...
This is perhaps the most important aspect of this election. Will we have a Surpreme Court which follows the Constitution and otherwise stays out of the political arena, or will we have a court of liberals who use the Court to impose leftist policies that could never be passed in the political process?
I can’t help but think Gang of 14.
The Gang of 14 wasn’t all that bad. They got Janice Rogers Brown, Pricilla Owen, and others cleared through the Senate, and seriously undermined the DemocRATS ability fo filibuster judicial nominees. Granted, we lost a few good nominees in the process, but we gained a lot, too.
The thought of McCain nominating judges scares me. The thought of godbama nominating judges scares me to death.
Are we talking about the same man who nominated Sarah Palin for VP? Cut him some slack.
Yep—We are talking about the gang of ten, reach across the aisle and I’ll nominate democrats McCain.
Yeah, McCain will nominate maybe two token Democrats to his cabinet. And Lieberman will be Sec of State or Defense.
So what? It’s a crowd pleaser with little meaning.
Since the court is composed of seven Republican-nominated “justices,” and only two who were Dem-nominated, and they’re still all a bunch of legal positivists who don’t understand the simple meaning of a simple word like “person,” it’s hard for me to be scare-mongered in this regard.
Five out of seven Republican appointed Justices voted to uphold our Second Amendment rights in Heller. Neither of the two Democrat appointees were in the majority.
It's not scare-mongering to suggest that Democrat appointments jeopardize our freedoms.
I don’t think you need to worry here. McCain will nominate pro-life judges.
It’s also completely factual to point out to you that John McCain also threatens our freedoms. Comprende?
Not if Uncle Teddy doesn't let him.
ALL government threatens our freedoms. But I'm not sure how accurate or helpful it is to suggest that there isn't a world of difference between McCain and Obama.
That's ridiculous. All government does not threaten our freedoms. In the American sense, all government exists to protect God-given, unalienable rights, by the consent of the governed.
John McCain disdains that sort of goverment, and it isn't hard to prove.
If anything "isn't helpful," it is your attempt to cover John McCain's perfidy with "everybody does it" argumentation.
Fine. Vote for Obama. Encourage your family and friends to vote for Obama. Because there just isn't any difference between the candidates. In fact, perhaps you don't even need to vote at all. Why waste your time?
No thanks. Unlike you, I don't vote for liberals, and neither do any of my family members or friends.
Because there just isn't any difference between the candidates.
Oh, there's a difference. It's just that both cyanide and strychnine will kill you if you drink them.
In fact, perhaps you don't even need to vote at all. Why waste your time?
Oh, I'll vote all right.
Care to say for whom you will vote and why?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.