In the way of a fine harangue (smackdown of GOP "activist judges" argument)

[antigop]

http://www.star-telegram.com/245/story/630151.html

John McCain ought to be ashamed of himself.

In his most pandering performance since speaking at Jerry Falwell's Liberty University to prove that he could schmooze even with agents of intolerance as long as they bring along Republican votes, McCain whacked away this week at that threadbare straw man, the "activist judge."

Speaking at Wake Forest University, he harrumphed about "the common and systematic abuse of our federal courts by the people we entrust with judicial power."

"For decades now," he claimed, "some federal judges have taken it upon themselves to pronounce and rule on matters that were never intended to be heard in courts or decided by judges."

And then he complained about lifetime-tenured judges who "show little regard for the authority of the president, the Congress, and the states. They display even less interest in the will of the people."

Well, here are some inconvenient details.

For decades now, Republican appointees have dominated the federal courts: 57 percent of the current judges were named by Republicans, including 386 by Bush father and son (326 are Clinton appointees), according to the Alliance for Justice.

goes on.....

[treestar]

1. The rule of law and the separation of powers are great problems for

repuklicans. They want the executive branch to just rule and be done.

[sinkingfeeling]

2. Nice generalized statement, McDubya! What are some of those matters that judges aren't

supposed to rule on? The Constitutionality of a law?