One More...

...Reason to vote for George Bush in '04. I took yesterday off to rest from the weekend from HELL I spent with the Ram Band (which I may get into later this week depending on time...), but I'm back now and ready to do a full dive into an article from yesterday's Washington Times. Here are some excerpts...

A rare chance to reshape top court

With up to three Supreme Court retirements expected in the next four years, the next president could play a huge role in tilting a court that is nearly evenly balanced "if any of his nominees can pass the Senate. "All reliable sources indicate that there will be between one and three retirements over the next four years, so everything we've seen happen for this first term for [President] Bush has been the warm-up round for the Supreme Court," said Sen. John Cornyn...

With the court divided nearly evenly, the next president probably will shape how the high court will handle key cases about the war on terror and the definition of marriage, which are winding through the lower courts. However, House Republicans have moved to strip the court of jurisdiction over marriage cases. Four years ago, during his campaign against Democrat Al Gore, Mr. Bush said if elected he would look for justices in the mold of Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas. Republicans said they still expect that. "I don't think anything has changed. That's one thing about President Bush "whether you like him or not, he's steady," Mr. Cornyn said...

He said Mr. Bush's names show that he wants justices who will referee constitutional questions, not write new standards. "I think what he's referring to is he believes judges should not make political decisions or make policy from the bench, but rather determine whether decisions made by the political branches are lawful," Mr. Cornyn said...

"Kerry and his presidency won't be nearly as bold politically as the Bush White House and will probably move toward the Clinton model" to try to find someone who is moderate and progressive," Mr. Durbin said. Mr. Bush has run into a Democratic blockade on some of his most contentious nominees for the lower federal courts. Democrats initiated filibusters against 10 nominees. Mr. Bush made recess appointments for two of those nominees, and another, Miguel Estrada, the first nominee to face a filibuster, withdrew his name.

This is huge folks. We all know that Bush is the man to fight the War on Terror. We all know that Bush is the man that can and will (when reelected) lead us out of the economic hardships we were in. We all know that Bush is the man to finish the job in Iraq. We all know that Bush... ok I think I've made my point...but even more importantly then this, Bush could be the man to set the path for Constitutional interpretation for the next bajillion years. Just think about it--if all goes well, we (that is, the Republicans) will control the House, the White House, and we could very well control the Senate by a narrow margin following the elections in November. If we have control, Bush can push his nominees through. These nominees, for a change, will be slanted in OUR favor. This could be a defining moment in the moral stability of the United States. New Justices which carry morals and Christian standards can, for a change, protect the important balance between Church and State, rather than crying "separation of Church and State" every time somebody uses the word "God" in a public place. For the first time in 30+ years we could win a case or two to help protect the rights of the unborn through abortion cases. We can crack down on terrorists with tough judicial standards. We can uphold the sanctity of traditional marriage. This is huge folks. This could be our last chance to strengthen the moral fabric of this great Nation. If for no other reason than this, we MUST re-elect GWB.

I'll be back tonight or tomorrow. I've got a couple more things to get into (especially concerning the ever entertaining Sociology book I'm studying out of...). Until then...