Breaking the Filibuster is Not Enough

RightConservative.com ^ | 05-23-05 | Justin Darr

[RightConservative]

Once in America the liberal agenda and its radical programs advanced unopposed. Liberals held sway over the elected branches of government, and over the course of decades, infected the judiciary system with cadres of like minded liberals who held their goals of forcibly restructuring American society superior to the welfare and will of the people. Faced with an uncaring and unresponsive government, America’s conservative majority turned to the only tool left for them to affect government change, the ballot box. Now, as the Conservative Revolution has swept Republicans into majority positions in the Federal and preponderance of state governments, liberals are making their last stand to prevent the will of the people from destroying the cancer they have grown in our judiciary.

The current fight in the Senate to possibly break the Democratic threat of filibustering several of President Bush’s judicial nominees is just one front in this conflict. While it is important that liberals’ obstruction tactics be stopped, it is also important to remember that we are talking about only 10 judges out of around 700 Federal judicial seats. Beyond symbolism, breaking the Democratic filibuster is insignificant in relation to the size of the problem we face with judicial activism.

[ClaireSolt]

The moral of this story is Don't vote for Lawyers. Lawyer legislators have created a system that is lawyer friendly to the detriment, often, of others.

[MarcusTulliusCicero]

Correct. That's why legislation is written in exactly the way that it is. Terms are used without definition precisely so that they can be widely interpreted. You'd think that legislation would be written with the same exactitude that is evident in business contracts. They leave very little wiggle room. Today's bills are written in such a way as to invite judicial re-interpretation. Of course, the best change that could be made would be require that every bill deal with a singel issue and that the first sentence or paragraph cite the Article and clause of the Constitution that makes it a Constitutional matter.