I visited his blog, and, as you said, it's not looking like he wants to talk about anything else. I left him a comment just because he seemed to want it to be tested, and I'm a sucker like that. I don't want to talk to him about his "injustice", but i don't have anything against him other than he's a pain in the neck.
I left this comment on the wrong thread, didn't I? the above comment was about Robin Edgar, obviously. Duh.
Scalito will probably be the new justice because the democrats will look like "poor sports" if they protest too vehemently another of Bush's choices.I would like to see there be other issues on the table rather than abortion. So long as Dems keep focusing on that, middle of the road folks are just going to start thinking, "geez louise, what do I care? i'm too old to have an abortion anyway." There's got to be SOME other reason to oppose this guy, right?
How about -- He doesn't believe in maternity leave or family illness leave. He doesn't believe in worker's rights. He does believe in race discrimination, he doesn't believe in the right to privacy. He has allowed a strip search of a ten-year-old girl who wasn't even the suspect in the case.
Wow- if any of that stuff were true, he'd be a horrible person! Of course, it's not. Striking down a poorly written law does not mean you disagree with the end goals of that law- it means the law was poorly written! Look at the death penalty- at one point, the Supreme Court struck down all death penalty laws in every state as unconstitutional- but it was the laws that were unconstitutional, not the penalty itself; when rewritten, the states were allowed to start killing people again. The striking of the laws did not mean the justices were against the death penalty, and the approval of the new laws did not mean the justices were in favor of the death penalty- they were concerned only with compatibility with the constitution.Joel monka
Post a Comment