I have an amplification on this, but need a decent night's sleep first. But I can't argue with anything that Wirecutter said. Go read.
9 comments:
Anonymous
said...
You must really love Kagan, Sotomayor, Hsu, and every other appointee since 2009. And administrative law banning kids' chores on farms, and all yhe rest.
I won't waste my time expecting you to care if the rest of us have to live with the intended results of your posturing, but what about your kids? You honestly just don't care? Or what?
Borepatch, I fully agree with Wirecutter and you. Except, instead of voting for Obama, I will be voting for Johnson (the Libertarian Party candidate). If everybody who is disgusted with Romney votes for Johnson in the general election, it might send a strong enough message to the Republican power elites that we do not want country club Republicans as our candidates. As to the worry about Supreme Court nominations: 1. Why do you think we will get anything better with Romney as President. Romney is consulting with Bloomberg and Bork. That does not bode well. 2. It is an excellent reason to pay close attention to who you are voting for in the House and Senate races. Remember, the President has to get his nominations past congress and it congress can overturn his executive orders.
I fear the only "strong message" that we can send to the Republican elites is by forming our own party. They have showed time and gain that they don't give a rat's ass about what we proles think -- the most recent example is how they're completely ignoring the Tea Party.
I'm with you on the SCOTUS nominations. Neither the Big Government Party nor the Bigger Government Party will ever support someone who will rein in their power.
My prediction is that it will eventually end with bullets and blood. I just hope that happens after I'm gone.
+1 on Johnson. Plus, as I understand it, if the Libertarian Party can get enough votes, they qualify for federal funds for the next election - which will let them get greater exposure and even more votes. Let's face it: barring an unexpected and sudden shift in the political landscape, there will not be a Libertarian Party president for at least another 8-20 years. But getting there will only happen if enough people are willing to put in the effort and not fall for the "lesser of two evils" fallacy.
Regarding SCOTUS justices, it's important to keep in mind that while one of them might die during the next presidential term, it's nearly certain that one of the ones we want to keep will retire if there's a Republican as president. With a Democrat as president, they'll do everything possible to stick around until after the next election.
So, Obama might get to nominate a justice if he wins, but Romney will get to nominate a justice if he wins. Personally, I'd rather take my chances that Obama won't get the chance than that Romney will pick someone who cares about the Constitution.
Well, I guess that when Romney wins and things are actually better in a few years than they are now, you can blame me. 'Cuz I'm definitely voting for him.
I'm not so much for Romney as I am against Eric Holder. Anything that gets him out of office (and the protections inherent therein) and replaces him with someone even SLIGHTLY less inclined to trample our liberties is good enough for me.
I have to say, my thoughts are along the lines of Erin and David...
If the R-choice is Romney and the D-choice is Obama... a vote for a third candidate is just another vote up for Obama... and for his Supreme Court choices and his Eric Holder nonsense...
9 comments:
You must really love Kagan, Sotomayor, Hsu, and every other appointee since 2009. And administrative law banning kids' chores on farms, and all yhe rest.
I won't waste my time expecting you to care if the rest of us have to live with the intended results of your posturing, but what about your kids? You honestly just don't care? Or what?
Borepatch, I fully agree with Wirecutter and you. Except, instead of voting for Obama, I will be voting for Johnson (the Libertarian Party candidate). If everybody who is disgusted with Romney votes for Johnson in the general election, it might send a strong enough message to the Republican power elites that we do not want country club Republicans as our candidates.
As to the worry about Supreme Court nominations:
1. Why do you think we will get anything better with Romney as President. Romney is consulting with Bloomberg and Bork. That does not bode well.
2. It is an excellent reason to pay close attention to who you are voting for in the House and Senate races. Remember, the President has to get his nominations past congress and it congress can overturn his executive orders.
@Tim Covington:
I fear the only "strong message" that we can send to the Republican elites is by forming our own party. They have showed time and gain that they don't give a rat's ass about what we proles think -- the most recent example is how they're completely ignoring the Tea Party.
I'm with you on the SCOTUS nominations. Neither the Big Government Party nor the Bigger Government Party will ever support someone who will rein in their power.
My prediction is that it will eventually end with bullets and blood. I just hope that happens after I'm gone.
+1 on Johnson. Plus, as I understand it, if the Libertarian Party can get enough votes, they qualify for federal funds for the next election - which will let them get greater exposure and even more votes. Let's face it: barring an unexpected and sudden shift in the political landscape, there will not be a Libertarian Party president for at least another 8-20 years. But getting there will only happen if enough people are willing to put in the effort and not fall for the "lesser of two evils" fallacy.
Regarding SCOTUS justices, it's important to keep in mind that while one of them might die during the next presidential term, it's nearly certain that one of the ones we want to keep will retire if there's a Republican as president. With a Democrat as president, they'll do everything possible to stick around until after the next election.
So, Obama might get to nominate a justice if he wins, but Romney will get to nominate a justice if he wins. Personally, I'd rather take my chances that Obama won't get the chance than that Romney will pick someone who cares about the Constitution.
Well, I guess that when Romney wins and things are actually better in a few years than they are now, you can blame me. 'Cuz I'm definitely voting for him.
I'm not so much for Romney as I am against Eric Holder. Anything that gets him out of office (and the protections inherent therein) and replaces him with someone even SLIGHTLY less inclined to trample our liberties is good enough for me.
A bad President can screw up this country and your life for four to eight years.
A bad supreme court justice can screw things up for a lifetime.
I have to say, my thoughts are along the lines of Erin and David...
If the R-choice is Romney and the D-choice is Obama... a vote for a third candidate is just another vote up for Obama... and for his Supreme Court choices and his Eric Holder nonsense...
Dann in Ohio
Obama will not get my vote...no way...
Romney?
Damn...
Post a Comment