Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Said1 said:
CockySOB said:Yeah, the whole gay marriage ammendment was a pretty blatant attempt to pander to the religious right who make up a large portion of the Republican base. The problem is that the current hot topic is illegal immigration and the apparent shift of the Republican leadership towards appeasement. If the Republican leadership can't identify their constituents primary concerns, then they're dooming the Republicans to the fate the Democrats now enjoy - irrelevance.
Exactly. GWOT, immigration, taxes, etc.musicman said:Agreed. The gay marriage amendment was a political gambit in 2004, and was recognized as such by the electorate. It was also a successful gambit, in that it smoked out Democrats who would rather have kept mum on the subject in an election year. And, that's fine - politics is a rough and tumble game.
But, it is just as much a political gambit in 2006, and is again recognized as such by the electorate. This time, though, it is not having its desired effect. The conservative base are not distracted; they would like to know where the Republican Party stands on the matters of common sense, the rule of law, and the will of the people.
Kathianne said:Exactly. GWOT, immigration, taxes, etc.
I've always been against amending the constitution. I think marriage, like abortion belongs at the state level.
There are currently 205 Bush selections among the 1,267 sitting federal judges, some of whom might well be around until the middle of the century. More than 100 judges still sitting on the court were nominated more than 30 years ago, by President Richard Nixon and his predecessors.
Overall, 741 of the sitting judges -- about 6 in 10 -- were nominated by Republicans, and 526 federal judges were nominated by Democrats, according to the Federal Judicial Center. All but one of the nation's 13 circuit courts -- the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, based in San Francisco -- have a majority of judges appointed by Republican presidents. Citation
jasendorf said:My thoughts? I think you're making excuses for the supposed "conservative" Republicans who voted for this usurpation of States' Rights.
jasendorf said:As for "rooting out judicial activism root and branch"... unless you're planning on burning the Constitution (or maybe repealing the entire third article)... I think you'd be hard pressed to do it.
jasendorf said:Problem is simple, you're fighting against a judicial system that is already run by conservatives; they're just not conservative enough for you. Hence, either these conservative judges are the activists or the judiciary is just not doing its job...