I don’t think that’s true. She’s more likely to be remembered for Casey.
Perhaps, but they were the only 2 left after the other 7 weighed in. O’Connor shares equal responsibility with Kennedy, and it’s too late to change.
The point was about her committment to judicial restraint. If you don’t follow a principle when it matters the most, it isn’t a principle. That’s how she’ll be remembered - “Our consideration is limited to the present circumstances”. (Captain, with all due respect for the Casey decision, it hasn’t affected nearly as many people as the Bush presidency, nor does it go to the heart of the meaning of democracy the way BvG did.)
One would hope so, EP being actually in the Constitution in black and white with SDP being only in the “penumbra”. It would be beyond perverse to take the opposite view.
Christian fundamentalism doesn’t mean what it used to, does it? Time was, the Biblical literalists used the Sermon on the Mount as the basis for radical populism - a hardcore believer like William Jennings Bryan was expected to be not only a committed creationist but a bitter opponent of the capitalist oppressors. The most committed fought the hardest for civil rights as well.
Well, yeah, although Bryan is really a bad example to use as a “model fundamentalist”, first because he was much more of an evangelical than a fundamentalist, he was a postmillenialist, and politically, he was a lot further to the left than mainstream fundamentalistm.
Oh, I absolutely agree that Romer v. Evans contains a fair bit of the State leaning on a segment of the population. I was drawing a contrast between pro bono criminal work and Blalron’s hypothetical abortion case, which I think would be governed by rather different considerations not only from criminal cases but civil rights cases like Romer v. Evans as well. I actually expected Bricker to make exactly this point if he responded to that question. As to what we can conclude from Roberts participation, my considered opinion is “Not a whole bloody lot.”
Well, Public Advocate of the United States, a Northern Virginia based hate group said that “if” the story is true, Bush should withdraw the nomination. The group is led by Eugene Delgaudio, a two-term Loudoun County Virginia Supervisor.
Yeah, “not” was a mistake.
link doesn’t work?
Try this. Not sure if it’s the same article, but it seems likely.
Their front page, http://www.publicadvocateusa.org/ , is announcing a press conference today to official withdraw support for Roberts.
Just to update this, Public Advocate has officially withdrawn their support, as this amusing column by Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank shows:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/10/AR2005081002353.html
However, Bryan did not avoid the Fundist label because then, it just meant someone committed to the basic doctrines of C’tian faith- the Bible as God’s Word,
and the Deity, virgin birth, atoning death, bodily resurrection & personal return of Jesus. Welfare-statism/Progressivism & Appeasement/Non-militarism were noble ideals held by many Fund’ists. However, fear of the economic statism predicted as the Beast System & of Communism did tilt many more to the Right. However,
issues such as abortion, gay rights & secularism sealed the Rightist-Fundist marriage.