Here's why I'm voting in the nationals:
ELECTION AT THE CROSSROADS
SUPREME COURT: Aging judiciary heralds historic transformation
(http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2004/10/18/MNGJR9BL8B1.DTL)
"The U.S. Supreme Court, like the nation, is closely divided on a host of issues -- abortion, race, religion, sexual orientation, the roles of judges and juries, and the powers of the federal and state governments, to name a few.
It is also a court that, by historical standards, is long overdue for change. The justices have been together for 10 years, the longest uninterrupted tenure since 1823. Only one justice, 56-year-old Clarence Thomas, is younger than 65. Three have been treated for cancer.
It adds up to a formula for potentially historic transformation: Whoever wins the presidential election Nov. 2 could reshape the court, the world's most powerful judicial body, in ways that long outlive his presidency (SF Chronicle, 10/18)."
The argument that there is no appreciable difference between the candidates withstanding, I would rather not live for the next 20+ years with the appointees of the guy who made Ashcroft attorney general. I'd rather the pledge of allegiance not be switched with the Our Father, or have presidential term limits lfted just in time for a 2008 Bush re-election (although, to be fair, Clinton tried the same trick).
Just a thought,
Dillon
ELECTION AT THE CROSSROADS
SUPREME COURT: Aging judiciary heralds historic transformation
(http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2004/10/18/MNGJR9BL8B1.DTL)
"The U.S. Supreme Court, like the nation, is closely divided on a host of issues -- abortion, race, religion, sexual orientation, the roles of judges and juries, and the powers of the federal and state governments, to name a few.
It is also a court that, by historical standards, is long overdue for change. The justices have been together for 10 years, the longest uninterrupted tenure since 1823. Only one justice, 56-year-old Clarence Thomas, is younger than 65. Three have been treated for cancer.
It adds up to a formula for potentially historic transformation: Whoever wins the presidential election Nov. 2 could reshape the court, the world's most powerful judicial body, in ways that long outlive his presidency (SF Chronicle, 10/18)."
The argument that there is no appreciable difference between the candidates withstanding, I would rather not live for the next 20+ years with the appointees of the guy who made Ashcroft attorney general. I'd rather the pledge of allegiance not be switched with the Our Father, or have presidential term limits lfted just in time for a 2008 Bush re-election (although, to be fair, Clinton tried the same trick).
Just a thought,
Dillon
<< Home