As Cathy might say, Dear Gentle Reader(s), "Aaaaagh!"
Today's The New York Times lead on line editorial carries this headline: "The Candidates and the Court." It concerns the likely imminent change in the make up of the United States Supreme Court.
The discussion centers on Senators Obama and McCain, with the bias of the editorial, to this biased eye, in favor of Mr. Obama, because of his stated inclination to "pick moderate justices, who would probably not take the court back onto a distinctly liberal path, but also would be unlikely to create an unbreakable conservative bloc." Mr. McCain, according to the Times, "has promised the right wing of the Republican Party that he would put only archconservatives on the Supreme Court."
No contest, eh wot?
The Times doesn't go into the vice presidential candidates. Perhaps someone should. It's been pretty much established that no one wants Governor Palin's finger on the red button, but what about her position on Supreme Court nominees? James Dobson's ilk?
Goodbye Roe v Wade; hello back alley abortions, again.
Looking a little peaked, there, habeas corpus.
Welcome back tommy guns. We've missed ya.
Sarah Palin one heart-beat from the presidency?
Forget Palin's foreign policy inexperience, how about her verifiable social experiences and decisions?
Um...what, DGR(s), was McCain thinking?
Trust, but, for the sake of the health of the Union, verify.
Sphere: Related Content
No comments:
Post a Comment
The courage of your conviction virtually demands your name, if we don't know you.