Skip to main content

How Much Clearer Does He Have to Be?

Bush denounces court wars, rules out 'litmus test'

COPENHAGEN (Reuters) - President Bush on Wednesday said he will not choose his Supreme Court candidate based on their position on specific issues such as abortion or gay marriage.

"I'll pick people who ... will strictly interpret the constitution and not use the bench to legislate from," he said.

Under pressure from opposing activists to pick someone who would either uphold abortion or work to outlaw it, and legalize or outlaw gay marriage, Bush ruled out any such "litmus test" in making his choice.

"There will be no litmus test," he said, repeating his position during his 2000 and 2004 presidential campaigns."

As I said before, before, those of us on the right, who want to see Roe V. Wade overturned need to 'chill' a little.

President Bush said he would nominate someone who he felt was a strong conservative. He also said over and over again he would NOT use a litmus test to pick a nominee. So what are we doing expecting him to pick someone based on a "test"?

We have cried foul with the Court being "activist" towards the left, yet it sounds like we dont' mind if they are activists, so long as they "activate" on our side.

From the beginning President Bush has said he would NOT pick a nominee who "legislates from the bench"! How can we not expect him to keep his word?

Again, we would need at least two more strong conservative appointments and THEN a case that challenged the "core right" of a woman to abort her baby, would need to be brought to the Court again.

As much as I would like to see it happen tomorrow, it will be years before this would realistically happen.

That's why I said, "Patience". Yes, babies are dying everyday, but they have been slaughtered everyday since 1973.

President Bush's nomination is but a "first step". We waited fourty-years to have this opportunity, rushing could jepordize our victory in the future.

Patience

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Calling Mr. Fitzgerald?

**UPDATED AND BUMPED****

As I told you about in this post yesterday as a source confirmed to me that the Justice Department has launched a probe into the NSA leak. Mr. Risen, you are in trouble - prepare your defense. I told you so.

The White House will be announcing the probe at about 12:30pm. My source tells me that this probe will most likely result in another prosecutor being assigned as of course Fitzgerald is still busy/dizzy on the Plame/Game No-Leak. Additionally, other probes into other recent leaks such as the CIA 'prisons'leak is in the works as well. As I said, this is the NEW Bush - on the attack - it's no more Mr. Nice Guy!

About time! Also covering Michelle Malkin

*****End Update*********

UPDATE II: Looks like I owe my source big time as yet another tip comes true as the Washington Post is on the target list as well for the CIA Prison leak.

****End Update II*************************************

Update III: Via Fox: "The government has no legal right to…

Is the lid about to be blown off Able Danger?

Those who have been wishing for a full blown Able Danger investigation are about to get their wish. The "gate" has been unlocked.

9/11 Iraqi Connection

With Democrats calling for yet more investigations into pre-war intelligence, and Republicans like myself pushing back to help their 'sudden amnesia”, the growing stories of Able Danger and even China Gate, are beginning to make news.

The three main theories about why Able Danger hasn't gotten out of the "blog stage", are 1) To hide Clinton era responsibility for stopping the 9/11 attacks, and/or 2) To hide the truth behind China-Gate, or 3) The facts show that there in fact was a direct link between Iraq and 9/11.

Taking either one you can see why the Clinton worshipping MSM for the most part hasn't touched the story. Of the later point, Democrats, the MSM and even some of our investigations state that there was no 'direct' link between Iraq and 9/11. Say otherwise and the MSM will slice and di…

Able Danger - Pulling Back the Covers of the real Clinton Legacy

First, let's dispense with the bull crap. The meeting between Mohammed Atta and Iraqi Intelligence officer Al-Ani, on April 8th, 2001 happened.

Yet, just don't mention it to the MSM, becaue since May of 2002, the MSM declared an all out assault on the story. A meeting incidently, that the Czech government has to this date stood by.

Let's review a little history:

October 13, 2001: Story of the meeting is leaked from somewhere in the Czech foreign service.

yet.....

October 20, 2001: Ny Times, John Tagliabue writes a story citing other Czech officials said the meeting never took place.

so.....

October 26, 2001: Czech Minister of the Interior, Stanislav Gross has a press conference not only confirming the orginal report but giving further details of Atta's other trip to Prague in June 2000.

then.....

October 27, 2001: The NY Times "recants" the October 20th denial.

The story continues it's oddessy of 'back and forth' until May 1st, 2002, when Walter P…