Posted on 02/15/2016 12:36:28 PM PST by jazusamo
Amid the petty bickering, loud rhetoric and sordid attack ads in this year's primary election campaigns, the death of a giant -- Justice Antonin Scalia -- suddenly overshadows all of that.
The vacancy created on the Supreme Court makes painfully clear the huge stakes involved when we choose a President of the United States, just one of whose many powers is the power to nominate justices of the Supreme Court.
Justice Scalia's passing would be a great loss at any time. But at this crucial juncture in the history of the nation -- with 5-to-4 Supreme Court decisions determining what kind of country America will be -- Scalia's death can be catastrophic in its consequences, depending on who is chosen to be his successor.
Given the advanced ages of other justices, the next president is likely to have enough vacancies to fill to be able to shape the future of the court that helps shape the future of America.
Already many people are complaining that the America they grew up in, and loved, is being changed into something they can barely recognize. Record numbers are renouncing their American citizenship.
Meanwhile, people with high level experience in the military and in the intelligence services are warning us against extreme dangers in a world where our adversaries' military power and aggressiveness are increasing, while our military forces are being cut back.
Against this background, the frivolous rhetoric and childish antics in the televised political "debates" are painful to watch. If ever there was a time to choose a president with depth, rather than glitter or glibness, this is it.
Whatever the achievements of anyone in some other field, we cannot afford a novice in the complex world of politics and government at a time of grave dangers at home and internationally.
(Excerpt) Read more at creators.com ...
As someone who once clerked for a Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, he will know how important choosing Justice Scalia's replacement will be. And he has the intellect to understand much more.
Ted Cruz is the best choice, and the only viable conservative choice!
Sowell definitely hasn’t ‘hinted’ what he thinks of Trump’s candidacy.
:)
Loved this quote on Trump by Sowell:
“If, by some miracle, Trump became president, what kind of president would he be? Do we need another self-centered know-it-all in the White House to replace the one we have now?”
Sowell of all people understands the folly of the liberal approach of having ‘the smartest people’ dictating policy in a top down approach instead of trusting the markets whenever possible and allowing for more innovation.
No he has made his opinion clear but at least in this piece he does not sound like he is one of the elites who don’t think Trump is fit to join their club. He did when he joined the “hit squad” from NRO.
That being said, a Trump presidency may surprise TS. I expect that a man who is not beholding to the interests that control all the politicians who need their PAC money (and that includes Cruz) will have the ability to make unfettered decisions for the country. I would like to see this done. Trump has also already indicated the direction he would take in a SC appointment. (Gave some example names, and indicated that they were just examples. Smart, sense he has not had that long to vet them.)
I will give Sowell credit for supporting Cruz and the next candidate that the special interests fear (after Trump is gone.)
Senator Ted Cruz has been criticized in this column before, and will undoubtedly be criticized here again. But we can only make our choices among those actually available, and Senator Cruz is the one who comes to mind when depth and steadfastness come to mind.I was initially appalled by Trump’s entry into the race, and then I was impressed by his truth telling.But I fear that Trump is reverting to type - IOW, not remotely conservative. As a former NYS resident I have known too much of Trump as a “New York values” person to ever be secure in any profession he could possibly make at this late date as to having the ability and determination to find another Scalia - several of them, actually, in a two-term administration - for SCOTUS.
Trump has done much more for vets than would be typical of a flat-out “liberal.” But you could certainly say as much good of Rudy Guliani, for whom there was initially a boomlet on FR for the 2008 Republican nomination until FReepers at large found out what “New York values” amounted to.
Thanks much for your reply. I do disagree though.
I think this has become a bit of a false mantra:
>>”control all the politicians who need their PAC money”
In political discourse “special” interest tends to be apply to those who don’t share your interest.
- I have and will continue to contribute to PACs who share my views and goals.
- Are you for more campaign finance “reform”? Not me.
- Trump tried to have his own and shut it down under pressure over some irregularities.
- I don’t doubt that, if he were the nominee, Trump will take contributions from “special interests.”
If you support honest, ethical candidates, then them doing the bidding of others against their own beliefs is not a worry. If you don’t then nothing else matters that much.
thanks again...
Solicitor General Thomas, Solicitor General. Too many folks who should know better make this mistake.
And yes, he is leaning toward Cruz. He’s a thinking man and this may very well change more than once as events unfold.
Thank you for your polite reply
Yes, I would support PACs with which I agree, and Trump is planning on RNC support when he wins the nomination. Thus, he will receive donor support which he now disdanes.
There is no way that we can get “money” out of politics. So I am not in favor of finance reform.
My main reason for supporting Trump was his independent plan to “self finance” the campaign and his indication that he would use the criteria of “what is best for the middle class” when making his decisions. I felt that this was one of the best criteria that I have heard from a pol. Of course the unspoken truth is that the pol must live up to what they say, (Hence your point about honest and ethical).
Since I have long waited for an honest discussion on immigration, my belief is that the above criteria will do more for the immigration debate than the present “low cost workers” and “democrat voters” provides
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.
