How is it that Bush gets away with this constraint refrain that he wants judges who won't "legislate from the bench"? I think it's another case of picking and choosing. If it's a liberal judge, it's legislating from the bench...but when conservative judges make new laws, it's OK. The right-leaning judiciary has largely given Bush the right to detain people indefinitely and to torture them. Nothing could be more contrary to the settled law of the land. And we know that Roberts, Miers, and Alito support that position. How is that not making law? If the court overturns Roe, isn't that making new law? Wasn't the court right to make new law with Brown v. Board of Education?
He just goes around squawking the same ol' bullshit and gets away with it. "Fight 'em over there so we don't fight 'em here." Right, ask London. "They hate us for our freedom." Love that chestnut.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment