Why We MUST WIN in 2004 (As If You All Can't See it Already)

[liberalpragmatist]

Ok, I'm preaching to the choir here, but I just really feel like the reasons WHY we must kick Bush out of office haven't really been discussed here, though they are pretty well assumed. The biggest thing abt a Bush 2nd term -- one that HAS NOT BEEN DISCUSSED HERE is this: the Supreme Court.

There have been no vacancies this presidential term. Rehnquist and O'Conner look like they're waiting in anticipation of a second Bush term. Stephens, a liberal, is hanging on, hoping that the Democrats will win in '04. Basically, all the vacancies have been put on hold -- every justice that would be inclined to retire is waiting till the next presidential term because they know that this environment is not friendly -- the country is too divided, and in the case of the liberals like Stephens, they'd be replaced by a Repub.

However, by 2005-2009, it's no longer going to be possible to wait. The next term will almost certainly see at least 3 vacancies, very possibly more -- Ginsberg may retire, Kennedy may retire, even Scalia may call it quits if he doesn't get to be Chief Justice.

Whoever's president in the next term has the power to completely reshape the court more than any other president since FDR. IT IS IMPERITIVE THAT WE GAIN CONTROL OF THE WH TO SAVE THE SUPREME COURT. OTHERWISE, WHAT IS CURRENTLY A MODERATE-CONSERVATIVE COURT WILL BECOME AN ARCH-CONSERVATIVE ONE FOR A GENERATION.

Is there any chance we can turn this into a campaign issue? And, in a separate but relevant question, who would be good liberal/democratic judges who could be appointed (keep in mind they have to be confirmed, so take into account their chances of that).