The Right Voice

John McCain ran one of the worst Presidential Campaigns that I have ever seen. It seems almost like he did not want to win. Sure, there was an uphill battle, but there was so much more he could have done to make it close, or even possibly win.

1. I live in the all-important battleground state of Virginia. I was bombarded by Obama campaigners, fliers, and sample ballots. I got nothing from the McCain camp. Nothing. On election at the long lines of the polls who was there? The Democrats. Who wasn’t? McCain people. Who won Virginia? Obama. Obama volunteers knocked on one million doors the day before the election. What did the McCain camp do? nothing.

2. The Interwebz. From day one Obama embraced the Web. He was on Facebook, Myspace, Twitter, LinkedIn, SecondLife, and multiple other Social Networking sites while McCain was nowhere to be found. McCain finally embraced the Web about two months too late. More on that in a little bit.

3. He never controlled the right narrative and always controlled the narrative  no one wanted to hear. Obama stated (for the entire campaign) that John McCain was just like George Bush. He had a response to that. About 3 weeks too late. He let that narrative control him and he was killed by it. When the economy was THE ONLY issue ANYONE cared about, McCain focused on Ayers. No one cared and it hurt him badly, yet he kept pushing it.

4. He never challenged anything that Obama said. Instead of pointing out that it is impossible for 95% of the peole to get a tax cut when 30% don’t pay taxes. He talked about a bill that Obama voted yes on in the Chicago state Senate in 2001. Who cares? No one did.

5. The financial meldown. This is where McCain’s campaign fell off the cliff. Obama stated (falsely) that it was 100% the fault of Bush and his economic policies that “McCain agreed with”. McCain did…nothing at first. Then…he did a lot more of nothing…Then he talked about Ayers and ACORN…then he came up with the worst possible solution. He wanted the Treasury to buy all the bad mortgages. Who thought that up?

6. Aside from “Country First” there were no sound bites for McCain. (unless you count “My friends”). Obama was able to lay out his plans clearly and succinctly. McCain was not. He never tried. If he had,  it would be something like “My Friends, you will spend $3,000 more on your health care, but, my friends, don’t worry. You will get a $5,000 tax credit” Whatever that means. McCain decided to focus on the strengths of his plan (which were few) instead of the weaknesses in Obama’s plans (which were more numerous).

7. Finally, everything that McCain did in the last 2 weeks of his campaign should have been done weeks, if not months, earlier. He gave a speech on election day that was full of fire and passion. Too bad it was on election day and not weeks before. he called for the resignation of Ted Stevens AFTER he was convicted. AFTER. Wow. Way to go out on a limb. Here’s what he should have done. He should have called for his resignation the day he was indicted. It would have greatly benefited many things. First, and foremost, it could have gotten Ted Stevens out og the US Senate (he was reelected BTW). It would have bolstered his position as a “maverick” (Palin too, she’s just as guilty) by going against his own party. Lastly, it would have bolstered his position as a pork buster. Lest we forget his now infamous Bridge to Nowhere? [Don’t worry though, even though he was facing criminal charges, Sen. Stevens was still able to earmark funds for Squirrel research on the bailout bill. What a disgrace.]

McCain, during the third debate, FINALLY said that he was not George Bush. He should have set the record straight during the first debate. He also came out guns ablazin’ and on the offensive during the third debate. Would have been great to see in the first two debates. He should have brought up ACORN at the beginning. Why no mention of the fact that they are under investigation in 14 states? He let him off too easy.

All in all his campaign was a failure due to both his staff for making such muddy policies and McCain himself for being “mavericky” when it wasn’t a good time to be one, and not being “mavericky” when it was time to be one.

Todd

I hate that I keep having to write posts that are so political because I know some of my readers have sharp differences in opinion, and I hate for politics to get in the way of friendships, but this is time I must say something.

I expected a lot of fluff and garbage, but nothing of substance. Even though the lies started early, I was fine until he unleashed the biggest lie of the campaign. He directly faulted George W. Bush for the financial meltdown. Here is the truth. It seems like the Obama campaign has struggled with the truth as the election draws to a close. A lot can be said about the McCain campaign and how they have altered the truth. This is much different. If anything, McCain has only stretched the truth to fit whatever point he was trying to make. Obama is flat out lying in his accusation of Bush. He says these words knowing that there is not a shred of truth in them, and the American public, as well as the media, just buys it stock, lock, and barrel. No need to look for the truth, Obama said it was so. Right? People are voting for Obama he represents “change”. Change that has yet to be defined. Let’s look at Obama’s other patterns of lies.

In Obama’s latest ad, “Try This” promoting his tax cut “facts” site, he misrepresented an analyst from The Heritage Foundation saying that he agreed with his tax plan. Even though, the analyst that was “quoted”, Rea Hederman, disputed those claims here, here, here, and here, the Obama campaign continues to run the ad. Next, the Obama campaign has the AUDACITY to criticize the McCain campaign for “selectively” editting audio tapes from Joe Biden. Obama needs to take a step down off his high horse and people need to stop putting him up on his high horse.

Todd

In case you live under a rock, Colin Powell, a Republican, endorsed Barack Obama, a Democrat, for President. I am disappointed by this. Not because he endorsed Obama, anyone can choose to support whoever they want. I am disappointed by this because of the reasons he gave for supporting Obama. The reason that stuck out to me the most was that Powell was fearful that McCain would appoint Justices like Scalia and Alito.

I thought that Colin Powell, former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, was a man of character. Apparently I was wrong. General Powell thinks that Justices should interpret the law in whatever way they see fit. That is not character. That is folding over to appease a small fraction of people. Standing up for what you believe in, in this case, the Constitution, is character. The Constitution was not written to change with whatever people might think at a certain time. It is a list of principles that this country was founded on would guide the country forever.
For YEARS, the Court has just legislated whatever they wanted without recourse from any other branch of Government. They pick and choose which parts of the Constitution they like and which parts they don’t. I wrote about it here. Interpreting the Constitution in that fashion is intellectually dishonest. In fact, there is nothing intellectual about it. All the justices do is insert whatever they think is right and make a weak, at best, Constiutional case for it. The Constitutional argument that was made for Roe v. Wade was that throughout the history of time there has been abortions. What? They also used to sacrifice virgins and burn women at the stake. Guess I can do that and it will be protected by the the Liberty clause in the 14th Amendment. Justice Blackman said it was OK for me to do that. You see how this is a slippery-slope.

This is why the Constitution was drafted. The principles found in the Constitution are unchanging. They don’t change with the times like a leaf in the wind. That is not principles, that is lacking character and principles. It’s OK to believe in something. It’s OK to have something that is unwavering. I never elected Ruth Bader Ginsberg. Why is she making legislative decisions? She is acting in a way that is contrary to what ALL the Founding Father’s agreed with. It wasn’t just the Federalists who thought this way, it was all of them. General Powell lacks character.

Todd

John McCain appeared on “The View” recently and talked about Supreme Court appointees. Of course, the question of Roe v. Wade was asked. However, those of us who have read the Constitution and understand how the Court works know that there is no point at all for this “concern” to be brought up. The Constitution states that The Supreme Court only has appellate jurisdiction. That means they can only hear arguments for a case after it has gone through the state, and district courts. Also, a case has to be brought up in the first place. Historically the Court’s favorite thing to do is to take a back seat. The cases have already been decided. They adhere to Stare Decisis - Let the decision stand.

They will rarely overturn a case (except in cases that were decided by incompetance like Plessy vs. Ferguson and The Dred Scott Case). The last time a case was brought before the Court dealing with overturning Roe v. Wade was 1991, and it was not overturned despite have on conservative majority in the Court and a President against abortion. It’s a moot point, but why let that get in the way of a juicy hook? The idea that John McCain as a strict interpreter of the Constitution also came up. He believes (as well as I do) that we should interpret the Constitution the way our founders interpreted it. So he believes the case should not be up to the court (and it shouldn’t). As Justice Scalia, saying as only Justice Scalia can say said this:

The point at which life becomes ‘worthless’, and the point at which the means neccesary become ‘extraordinary’, or ‘inappropriate’ are neither set forth in the Constitutio nor known to the nine Justices of this Court any better than they are known to nine people picked at random from he Kansas City phone directory

To think that the black robe of the Supreme Court gives them clairvoyance to know anything of right and wrong, moral or immoral is foolish. To give them powers that are not granted to them in the Constitution is even more foolish.

After McCain spoke Whoopi Goldberg interrupted. She asked if she had to worry about becoming a slave because McCain said we should follow the Framers. Well, she must not know our position so I’ll tell her. We don’t agree with the notion that the principles of the Constitution change, and we don’t like Justices changing it based on their own personal preferences at the time of their ruling. We think that the only way to declare something “unconstitutional” is to change the Constitution through the amendment process. It appears that Whoopi Goldberg has never read the 13th Ammendment either, so I will help her with that too.

Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime where of the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

Section 2. Congress shall have the power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

Seems pretty cut and dry. I bet there is a Justice who believes in a living document that will one day read into that amendment that it was not talking about slavery and will re-institute it. Quick, let’s start a panic over nothing.
Todd

Well, not really, no, I am not. But, I was featured on the blog of Rep. Eric Cantor’s personal blog because he spoke at The Conservative Blogger’s Briefing at work today.

I’m in the purple tie. 5th from the left. Seated next to me is John Fund from the Wall Street Journal. He was there to tell us about his book Stealing Elections which talks about how voter fraud is stealing elections and how ACORN is only fueling the fire of voter fraud. He also states that Florida in 2000 was just a sample of how bad the election can be this year if steps are not taken. 14,000 lawyers have been deployed to contest any close election result. H likened it to having a lot of underbrush in a forest with 14,000 people that had matches. Not good.

…to write for the Huffington Post. (I would link, but I don’t even want to give them one visitor from me). It must be a pretty easy gig. They can just write whatever they want present it as fact opinion and not have ANY facts or sources to back anything up. Here’s the kicker - the left takes it in as fact, without question, then they have the nerve to tell the right that we are close minded. It would be great if they took stock of themselves before blasting us.

My good friend BH enlightened me to the latest post by blogger Frank Schaeffer. I will break down what he said and expose it for what it is.

That said…I know (as you pro-lifers do if you’re honest) that the Republicans have milked the abortion issue, as have the Evangelical and Roman Catholic leadership, for every dime it’s worth for fundraising, votes, power and empire-building, without changing much if anything. As I said, I also am fully aware that Senator Obama is pro-choice. I think his pro-choice views are out of character with his otherwise generous and enlightened world view.

There is a good reason the Evangelical right has “milked” the abortion issue. We believe that life begins at conception abortion is equated to murder in our eyes. So yes, we would support legislation to ban that. What basis do you have for “thinking” Obama’s pro-choice views are out of character? Other than, of course, helping you sleep at night. What is his “generous and enlightened world view”? What does that even mean? Does talking down to an entire group of people make you enlightened? Does having members of your own party call you an elitist who is out of touch with average Americans make you generous? What makes his world view so enlightened? It’s easy to just say, now back it up. He goes on.

The pro-life cause poisoned many of us who were part of it. Me included. It led to self-righteous hubris that extended to a general attitude of hate toward the “other.” For instance power hungry strivers such as James Dobson and Pat Robertson took the passion generated by the pro-life cause and fueled their wholly illegitimate war against gay Americans with it, not to mention their multi million dollar empires. Our cause became all about power over other people, money and the muscle to win elections, not about the good of unborn babies and women.

I love how he uses the term “poisoned” here. Yes, fighting for what you believe poisons you. There must be no chance of Obama being poisoned for fighting for what he believes in because a) he has no firm convictions of any kind (must be because he’s so enlightened) or b) because he is so pure of heart from being so generous that it is impossible for him to be poisoned by a cause. How exactly is the “war” against gay people illegitimate? How is it a war. They believe that a union is formed between a man and a woman, and that is a view supported by the Bible, which they follow. I know what your reaction to that is. You will say that that passage was from the Old Testament, and I know how you liberals hate the Old Testament. Consider this, though. The rest of chapter 18 of the book of Leviticus warns against incest. Should we allow that? It seems we would have to if we agree to get rid of the passage about homosexuality. You can’t pick and choose what you want to follow from the Bible.

How can you even call it a war? Dr. Dobson and Pat Robertson talk to those who ALREADY agree with them. How can you call it a war when marriage legislation on state ballots passes overwhelmingly in every state where it is introduced? Why do you feel the need to say what is best for anyone but yourself? i know, you are a liberal. By being a liberal you automatically know what is best for everyone - whatever you think. You are a smart man (I don’t know for sure, I am assuming) so you must understand the correlation between electing people who will stop abortion legislation and the advancement of the pro-life movement, but you are only intersted in presenting a distorted reality. He continues.

I describe this corruption in my book, CRAZY FOR GOD-How I Grew Up As One Of The Elect, Helped Found The Religious Right, And Lived To Take All (Or Almost All) Of It Back. I explore what happened to us as we were lured by politics and money. So lots of folks who are in the Evangelical/Republican/Roman Catholic establishment and who are still earning a good living through the culture wars hate my book (and me) for spilling the beans.

Oops, sorry, this is where he plugs his book on how he is above trying to make money and peddle influence, so by it and see how self-righteous a person can be. Let’s get to more claims.

That said… First, a nod to reality: even if Roe were reversed (it won’t be no matter who is president) the abortion pill and the acceptance of at least some types of legal abortion by most Americans guarantees there will be access to abortion. Besides, on a state-by-state basis abortion would remain legal in most states no matter what the court does. And as we have seen the Republicans haven’t really changed anything in thirty years.

This may be his most valid point. However, he is still distorting reality. In my opinion (since this map would indicate a conservative state majority) that a majority of states would either outlaw or heavily restrict it. I have no idea how he came to his conclusion and I would love to know. Besides, even if his baseless claim was correct it SHOULD be a state issue any way. Let the people decide not 9 judges who are above any kind of checks and balances. He still has more.

It isn’t just a matter of voting for Obama. Americans who want there to be a country left in which to argue our issues must vote against McCain. As his support for the Bush lies about Iraq shows McCain is hung up on his own version of post-Vietnam traumatic stress disorder. This is a man who would take our civilian culture down in flames and sacrifice it to his sense of death-or-glory military “honor.” How do you “win” a wrong war? McCain will make the world more dangerous. You think Bush was a cowboy? Just try McCain.

Wow, some pretty nasty claims made in that whopper. He takes the position that because we found no weapons new weapons of mass destruction (however, Saddam did have older weapons that were not apart of the UN sanctions, but are still just as deadly) that he lied to the people. Here is the fly in the ointment that everyone looks past. There was an International community of intelligence that had the exact same information that we did. That is one dilly of a conspiracy.

Bush has destabilized the world. The latest evidence of this is the fact that Russia attacked Georgia. In the climate of Bush’s aggression, where is our moral standing to criticize Russia? McCain offers no alternative. These too are life issues.

Not even worth arguing. It is COMPLETELY different situation, but why let that get in the way of good spin and coercion? Bush went through the UN, got a “Coalition of the Willing” together, gave Saddam several warnings for months and months without compliance. Whereas Russia just invaded without warning to signify their return to imperialistic power. Russia then promised a cease fire and have yet to comply with their own promise. Meanwhile, Iraq has a new government that was selected by the Iraqi people, a chance to become a very prosperous nation with trading leverage with oil. How is it even remotely the same thing? I think Frank has lost his moral standing.

At heart of the abortion reality is this: we are a consumerist society with a heart of stone when it comes to the poor, who account for four times the national average of people having abortions, mostly because of economic needs that Republicans don’t lift a finger to address. And we still denigrate women and female sexuality.

That first point  is simply untrue. How can he sleep at night making claims like that? There are fundamental differences between the way conservatives and liberals view the poor. Conservatives believe that by letting the poor pull themselves up by their bootstraps and letting them earn their own living free from government control. The liberal philosophy is to use taxpayer money to give them welfare until they get back on their feet. I see one very strong problem with this philosophy. It creates laziness. People become complacent and have no desire to remove themselves from receiving welfare. Who would stop receiving free money for no reason? This creates a burden on the tax payer. Both are just theories of what happens and it all depends on human nature. He has the gall to go on.

For all you sanctimonious Evangelicals out there, also note: when it comes to squeaky clean family values, Senator Obama — not Senator McCain — should be your role model. The Republican right wants us to draw back in horror from Obama because he is pro-choice, but this is the same group working to get a philanderer who abandoned his wife because she had a disfiguring accident, elected.

OK, now I have heard just about everything. Obama is squeaky clean? Wow. First of all, no one has ever said that McCain is squeaky clean. Here are Obama’s values. They say you can tell a lot about a person who you associate yourself with. If that is the case, Obama has a very terrible personality. Obama’s good friend “William Ayers is the worst kind of person. While at an Obama fund raiser at his house, he rejoiced in the murder of Sharon Tate because she disagreed with him. He also bombed the New York Police Department, the Capitol, and the Pentagon. His only regret: He didn’t do enough. While he did not kill anyone he caused a pipe to burst and shorted out all the computers. We were fighting the Vietnam War at the time and the Pentagon lost contact with most of the soldiers in the sky. One of those soldiers just happened to be John McCain. Obama was a staff member for years for the government program ACORN which has done little else then register illegal immagrants and deceased people to vote. This is the politics he learned in the still corrupt Chicago Political Machine. A Richard Daly has been mayor for over 100 years.

Obama’s Mentor Frank Marshall Davis sympathizes with the Soviet Union. I guess killing tens of millions doesn’t really bother him. I wonder how much rubbed off on Obama? Yet, another friend of Obama is a former member of the PLO Rashid Khalidi. Khalidi hated Israel and is a friend of Yasser Arafat. Is this the kind of extremeism that will bring this country together? Let us not forget Jeremiah Wright. He is important to note because Obama atteneded his church for 20 years. 20 years of racism and hatred from the pulpit. Then all of a sudden, when it was not politically viable he stopped going. In his press conference he asked if we had ever been in a church where you disagreed vehemently with the pastor? No, you jackass. I have never once had a pastor ever say anything related to politics from the pulpit. Ever. It is not appropriate for church, well real churches anyway. I can also say that if a pastor ever spouted any form of racism, I would not hesitate to leave right in the middle of the service. I guess Obama was OK with the racism. Why would he keep going?

It isn’t just a matter of voting for Obama. Americans who want there to be a country left in which to argue our issues must vote against McCain. As his support for the Bush lies about Iraq shows McCain is hung up on his own version of post-Vietnam traumatic stress disorder. This is a man who would take our civilian culture down in flames and sacrifice it to his sense of death-or-glory military “honor.” How do you “win” a wrong war? McCain will make the world more dangerous. You think Bush was a cowboy? Just try McCain.

The only threat to our current culture is Obama. His universal health care will be like every single government program to come before it - a disaster. The card check bill that dems are licking their chops over will put an end to secret ballot elections for union membership. This will basically force people to join unions if one is organized at their workplace. I will die before I ever join a union. There is nothing more useless in my opinion. So crappy universal health care and tons more unions. It will become more and more like the Soviet Union. Ask any russian how great the Soviet Union was. I dare you. You won’t though because it will ruin your pie in the sky idealistic view of them.

The Republicans have contributed to climate change by coddling oil companies and car companies and ducking the hard environmental and energy policy questions for thirty years. They have literally sold our country to the highest polluting bidders from the Saudis to the Chinese. Therefore the Republicans have literally risked the ability of our planet to sustain all human life born and unborn. So much for human life values.

Just when I thought I have heard everything, he unloads another load of crap. Yes, this is crap. There is no other way to describe it. Apparently, Frank has not seen the republican’s All of the Above  energy plan. Saying that is has contributed to climate change is not only baseless, is has not been proven. It’s nice to say because whoever says the magic words of climate change will get funding and it works to scare people into thinking the world is ending so they will pass legislation that will destroy the economy all in the name of suedo-science. Also, he MUST be live under a rock or has an inability to read. It is Nancy Pelosi who wants to keep getting oil from the Saudis. Republicans want to Drill Here and Drill Now. Republicans want to get rid of dependence and move to alternatives. The democrats want to take a vacation. I would love to know how oil is making human life unsustainable on this planet. It can’t be explained because it is simply not true.

Who will help us to become a nation that values life — abortion rhetoric aside? Obama.

This makes absolutely no sense and is completely baseless. Here is the problem with his opinion. He presents it as fact which is impossible to prove. You need to look at voting records and who Obama is likely to appoint to the Court. It’s not about Roe v. Wade, it’s about  keeping the restrictions in place and the Obama appointed court will only  decrease  restrictions based  on their “interpretation” of the Constitution.

So there you have it. I hope I have enlightened a few. It is important not to take things as fact, or even viable, especially if it comes from the Huffington Post. They are the worst.

Todd

While John McCain is accepting the nomination of the Republican party to run for President there will be another rally down the street it what is billed as the “Rally for the Republic” aimed at getting republicans, as well as the rest of America, back to its Conservative roots. The timing of this is deplorable, however, and I cannot support it.

Don’t get me wrong. I believe strongly in he conservative principles that this rally is fighting for. I beleive that America is at its best when the markets are free for competition, free from government regulation, a vastly reduced government, and a government that cuts out wasteful spending and cuts funding to unnecessary programs. For those of you who have not read Barry Goldwater’s “The Conscience of a Conservative” I STRONGLY suggest reading it. It gives insight to ideals that came under fire (unjustly) in the 60s and are coming under fire (unjustly) again today. I have nothing but the utmost respect for Barry Goldwater. I had the opportunity at a conference I went to hosted by my friends at Americans for Prosperity to meet Barry Goldwater, Jr. and I agree with all the same principles he does.

However, I cannot support this “rally” because it will take focus off the republican convention down the street where McCain desperately needs the post convention “bump” in the polls if he is to stand a chance in November. Every single person speaking, or attending, that rally will agree that any Republican is better than Barack Obama and a democrat controlled congress. I have no idea what they are trying to prove and staging this rally will not prove anything, It’s only purpose will be to feed egos and cause a split in the Republican party that could prove to be disastrous.

If Barack wins in November and the Dems gain in Congress, it will be a DISASTER for conservatives. Government will expand, government programs will swell, spending will increase exponentially, and liberal Justices who have an extremely suspect view of the Constitution will be appointed and confirmed with no opposition. Is this the America they want? This is the America that could be if they choose now to spread their agenda.

Let me reiterate. I agree with their agenda and I would probably attend the same rally if it were held at a different time. Sometimes though, we MUST choose the lesser of two evils. This is one of those times. Maybe these classic conservatives (of which I am one) can follow the 11th Commandment of another classic Conservative - Do not attack your own party!

Todd

Due to security, no cars, no photos, no tours, no access. Just hundreds of buses and thousands of Metro Riders everyday.

With Barack Obama winning the Democratic nomination today in South Dakota (A state where he does not even know the name of the capital city, by the way) two question were raised for me. Why did people vote for him, and what exactly is his platform? he uses buzzwords like “change” and “hope”, but does not say that much. He has a “Washington outsider” thing working for him. Working for him? That sounds good to the naive public, but not to Washington. For Washington, change is a problem, so they will be resistant. Obama has done nothing in the past to prepare him to be president.

In Washington, and especially in the Senate, there is a totem pole and freshman are on the bottom. Obama is a Freshman Senator. He has never sponsored any bill, he has never been a chairperson or co-chair person for any committee and has no foreign relations experience. I ask again. What makes him think he can be president? What ideas does he bring to the table. Oh, I know. He’s going to withdraw all the troops from Iraq. that will solve everything1 You know, because it’s so stable in the Middle East right now? Iran will just sit idly by and do nothing because Obama is going to talk to him. Well, when Obama convinces the President of Iran to act peacefully towards the middle east, no one will care because everyone will be watching the monkeys fly out of my backside. He is projecting a world of rainbows and butterflies that is impossible to achieve and people are buying it hook, line, and sinker. Not everyone wants peace. Not everyone wants to negotiate. It would be great if this was a perfect world and they did, but this is the reason why it is not a perfect world - because they don’t.

Obama also thinks he is better than most people. That is a slap in the face of every single American. Some elitist prick from Hawaii thinks he is better than you because he is from Chicago. Well, where I come from, Chicago is flyover territory. Second city? Please. More like Capital of the midwest. You can take Chicago and shove it. You don’t impress me. I heard Obama say that he will debate McCain on foreign policy and win. Can you really be that arrogant? Is that even possible? McCain has been in the Senate for 30 years and the Foreign Relations committee for over 20. He knows a whole heck of a lot more about foreign policy then Obama could ever hope to know at this juncture. What does Obama bring to this debate? He brings ideas of things he’d like to happen. McCain brings experience and knowledge of how other governments operate.

A good friend of mine recently sent me a letter Obama composed for his constituents regarding his reasoning for voting against John Roberts. He told me his reasoning was well thought out and he respected his opinion. I read the letter and had a completely different view of it. he
stated somewhere in the letter that he did not vote for Roberts because he thought that he would control the Court and policies.

“is that while adherence to legal precedent and rules of statutory or constitutional construction will dispose of 95 percent of the cases that come before a court, so that both a Scalia and a Ginsburg will arrive at the same place most of the time on those 95 percent of the cases — what matters on the Supreme Court is those 5 percent of cases that are truly difficult. In those cases, adherence to precedent and rules of construction and interpretation will only get you through the 25th mile of the marathon. That last mile can only be determined on the basis of one’s deepest values, one’s core concerns, one’s broader perspectives on how the world works, and the depth and breadth of one’s empathy.“

Much like Ted Kennedy’s beef with Robert Bork. The idea that one single Justice could rule America is absolutely unfounded and ridiculous. In fact, it is exactly what Scalia and Roberts are trying to avoid. Constitutionally, the Court is VERY weak. The least of the three branches. Have only appellate jurisdiction and having first say involving foreign dignitaries. That’s it. No where does it say that the Court has the right to review laws and judge them based on the Constitution. Nowhere in the Constitution does it say that the President has to listen to the Court. This happened famously when Andrew Jackson, not agreeing with John Marshall’s decision saying:

“John Marshall has made his decision, now let him enforce it”

Only when you read into the Constitution and add things that are not there do you runthe danger ofthe Courts running the country. Roberts and Scalia are not the ones to worry about. Getting back to the point earlier of the interpretations of the letter, while my friend thought it was great, I had a very different take. I read the whole letter and the letter said this: