President John Kerry And Judges

“Furthermore, you should never, never, never, forget about judges. Because liberalism is so unpopular, the Democrats count on getting activist liberal judges to implement their agenda over the protests of the voters (perfect example: gay marriage in Massachusetts). Because the Senate Republicans have wimped out, the Dems have managed to block a number of Bush’s judges, but Bush has gotten 198 of them through and given that 7 of the 9 Supreme Court Justices will crack 70 by 2008, it’s entirely possible that the winner of this election could significantly change the balance of the Supreme Court. Who would you rather see picking 3 or 4 new Supreme Court Justices over the next four years: George W. Bush, an imperfect conservative or John F. Kerry, one of the most liberal members of the Senate?” — John Hawkins, July 20, 2004

Scary Thought: Had John Kerry been elected instead of George Bush, we would now be preparing to add the 2nd LIBERAL judge to the Supreme Court.

That means that with a Kerry presidency, we’d have likely had 6 liberal members of the SCOTUS, 1 moderate, and just 2 conservatives as of February, 2006.

Furthermore, you have to think that the chances of Stevens and/or Ginsburg retiring would have gone up considerably if there were a liberal in the White House who they knew would replace them with a likeminded justice.

So, if John Kerry had been able to defeat Bush, instead of being one judge away from perhaps being able to reverse liberal victories in the court that stretch back for decades, the court would have been a liberal bastion for the foreseeable future.

Although Bush hasn’t been as conservative as we’d like in a lot of areas, his victory was incredibly important for the future of our country and the conservative movement in general, not just because of the war on terrorism and his tax policies, but because of his appointments to the Supreme Court.

Share this!

Enjoy reading? Share it with your friends!

Send this to friend