Friday, July 16, 2004

Just to clarify my position stated below:


I don't really have a problem with moderate Republicans. I do fall a little on the left side of the spectrum in most issues, but I can assure you I would have the same problem if Peliosi was pushing this agenda though. I think the strength of our political system relies on individuals disagreeing with each other, and winning and losing issues.

It is no secret to my friends that I don't support our current executive branch, but neither do I think Democrats should have a monopoly on power. I think it is very dangerous for any group in power to contemplate methods of silencing dissent, either by postponing elections or stripping the courts of their jurisdiction.

News Flash to the right wing, most people in America don't want to amend the constitution to make gay marriage illegal. I know you think it is very important, but you can't do it unless you follow the rules. Even Clarence Thomas would agree with that. Changing the rules so that you don't have to follow them is cheating.

Anyway, I will be following this issue as time allows. For you legal historians, I think you might find some similarities between this and Roosevelt's court packing plan, and maybe Lincolns plan to "overrule" the Supreme Court. Both of those worked, so one has to wonder what this will result in.



BTW: Kudos to Roman Candles for the quote)

No comments:

 
Faith, here’s an equivocator, that could swear in both the scales against either scale; who committed treason enough for God’s sake, yet could not equivocate to heaven. O, come in, equivocator. -Shakespeare, Macbeth: 3.2.9-12