Quote Of The Day

“For all too many years, in too many cases, we’ve seen non-elected judges imposing their own values and policy views and disregarding the democratic rights of the people. From the free exercise of religion in public places, to the pledge of allegiance, to issues of life itself, some judges are acting like legislators. In two national campaigns, George W. Bush ran on a promise to nominate judges who will faithfully interpret the Constitution and the laws of our country. He’s kept that promise, and he’s given the nation two outstanding members of the Supreme Court, Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito. (Applause.) In this second term, the President will continue to appoint men and women who understand that judges must be servants of the law, and not legislate from the bench”. —Vice President Dick Cheney, visiting CPAC

28 Responses to “Quote Of The Day”

  • Kjerringa mot Strommen

    You’re joking, right?

  • Richard Thomas

    Cheney said:

    “..George W. Bush ran on a promise to nominate judges who will faithfully interpret the Constitution and the laws of our country…”

    What does it mean to faithfully interpret the Constitution and the laws of our country?

  • Is that why the Republican party nominates judges from the Federalist Society?

  • Yep, and one could only hope they nominate many more from such a fine organization. 🙂

  • Richard Thomas

    Whether you call it Originalism or Strict Constructionism, it all comes down to:
    “Interpret the document to suit my needs.”

    The Constitution, like other documents, is made up of words and can be interpreted in various way by various people. To say that there is only one way, the original way, to interpret it is ludicrous.

    To disprove Originalism, all you need to do is look at how those who claim to be Originalists ruled on laws or interpreted the Constitution.
    For example, here are members of the Federalist Society arguing over domestic surveliance.

    Thomas Jefferson was a ‘strict constuctionist,’ so if you believe in that doctrine then you would believe that a National Bank or the Federal Reserve is unconstitutional.

    “Hamilton’s next objective was to create a Bank of the United States, modeled after the Bank of England. A national bank would collect taxes, hold government funds, and make loans to the government and borrowers. One criticism directed against the bank was “unrepublican” -it would encourage speculation and corruption. The bank was also opposed on constitutional grounds. Adopting a position known as “strict constructionism,” Thomas Jefferson and James Madison charged that a national bank was unconstitutional since the Constitution did not specifically give Congress the power to create a bank.”

  • I don’t want to give the impression that I think originalism philosophy somehow solves all judicial problems, or that somehow when judges all become originalist that they will all start voting unanimously, all originalism gives you is a frame work from which to look at the constitution, and from that frame work, there still will be fierce disagreements.

    But one thing that is unique with ‘originalism’ as a judicial philosophy compared to its alternative, the ‘living constitution’ judicial philosophy is that originalist judicial philosophy tends to – not always but more so than living constitution – leave moral issues in the hands of the voters. In other words, if you want gay marriage, vote for it, don’t push it down the countries throat through judges, same goes with all other moral issues, like abortion, the death penalty, and so forth. Whereas the living constitution judicial philosophy makes judges the arbiters of morality, originalism makes voters the arbiters of morality, and it is that fundamental difference that makes me a supporter of originalism.

  • I don’t feel comfortable with the choice of either judges or voters deciding whether it is proper for adults to engage in consensual contracts and voluntary associations.

  • Neither do I, but I feel that voters are the lesser of the two evils.

  • Neither do I, but I feel that voters are the lesser of the two evils.


    Of course you do.

    If you take many of these decisions out of the hands of groups the individual is left to decide. Who are you or by right do you claim the power to stop a woman from aborting her fetus?

  • Who are you or by right do you claim the power to allow a woman to abort her fetus?

    The question goes in both directions.

  • Richard Thomas

    “Neither do I, but I feel that voters are the lesser of the two evils. ”

    The lesser of two evils is still evil.

  • Yes, but it is less evil.

  • Fastidious answer back in return of this issue with genuine arguments and describing everything regarding that.

  • I was reading through some of your content on this internet site and I believe this web site is really informative!
    Continue putting up.

  • gT9kvC pbmkepchdqvx, [url=http://wshfzanqyrpq.com/]wshfzanqyrpq[/url], [link=http://mngfzancsdss.com/]mngfzancsdss[/link], http://rriailedjxfr.com/

  • Have you ever thought about adding a little bit more than just your articles?

    I mean, what you say is valuable and everything. But think of if you added some great
    images or videos to give your posts more, “pop”!
    Your content is excellent but with images and video clips, this site could certainly be one of the very
    best in its niche. Fantastic blog!

  • I really like your blog.. very nice colors & theme.
    Did you design this website yourself or did you hire someone to
    do it for you? Plz reply as I’m looking to create my own blog and would like to know
    where u got this from. thanks

  • Hmm it appears like your site ate my first comment (it
    was extremely long) so I guess I’ll just sum it up what I submitted and say, I’m thoroughly enjoying your blog.
    I too am an aspiring blog blogger but I’m still new to everything.
    Do you have any points for first-time blog writers? I’d certainly appreciate

  • Undeniably believe that which you stated. Your favorite
    justification seemed to be on the internet the easiest thing to be aware of.
    I say to you, I definitely get irked while people think about worries that
    they plainly do not know about. You managed to hit the nail upon the top and also defined
    out the whole thing without having side-effects , people can take a signal.
    Will probably be back to get more. Thanks

  • It’s awesome to pay a quick visit this website
    and reading the views of all mates on the topic of this post, while I am also zealous of getting know-how.

  • This is really attention-grabbing, You’re a very professional blogger.

    I’ve joined your rss feed and sit up for in quest of more of your great post.
    Also, I have shared your web site in my social networks

  • Stunning quest there. What happened after?

  • Good write-up. I certainly love this website.

  • I just couldn’t go away your site before suggesting that I actually enjoyed the standard
    info a person supply for your guests? Is gonna be again frequently in order to check up on new posts

  • Having read this I thought it was really enlightening.
    I appreciate you taking the time and effort to put this information together.
    I once again find myself personally spending a lot of
    time both reading and commenting. But so what, it was still
    worth it!

  • This site certainly has all the information and facts I needed about this
    subject and didn’t know who to ask.

Leave a Reply