What It's All About

Justice O'conner retires... this is the event that make elections important. Were one to take the time to go back to Oct/Nov 2000 and or those months in 2003 you would see I said the same thing. It is still a crap shoot but it is an opportunity to put someone on the court who does not 'make' law, but 'interpret' law.

I have found it very interesting the different descriptions used for Justice O'conner. Generally people talk of her moderation, being the swing vote, blah blah blah. When she was the swing vote resulting in the electin of President Bush in 2000 she was every rotten name in the book. When she was the swing vote in some abortion votes, she was a moderate. It always comes doen to whose ox is being gored.

As for me? All I really want is a judge who will make decisions based upon LAW, and the constitution of these United States. The liberal bent in this country has for many years been able to use the courts to make their gains. How many politicians run for office espousing their liberalism? Not many... why? Because they can't win by 'advocating' their beliefs... BUT, the courts have in effect made law based on their decisions. That is why The Supreme Court is so important... it (at this point in history), the only avenue the liberals have of getting their way.

The Congress is showing signs of FINALLY taking back some of their power... being one of the three branches of government and in fact being the branch who is SUPPOSED to make the laws, they are rebelling about the recent court decision on eminent domain. Congress controls the purse strings, so they are trying to make it LAW that if a local government snatches one's property for business development (the recent decision), then the government will not contribute any monies for said development. I think this is a good thing and hopefully will put back some of the power of congress. The fact the court said a local government could take someones property is making law, not interpreting current law. Not the courts job.

It will be a rowdy few months... I know a couple of things: 1) it matters not who the president nominates - they will be villified... 2) The Chief Justice should go also 3) This president, who up to this point has scorned the polls, will continue to show backbone and nominate someone who he at least 'believes' is an interpreter of the law, and one who will not 'make' law.

One more time - THIS is what we elect presidents for, not much else matters when one considers 'the rule of law'.