Friday, November 21, 2003

NRO: A Big Change in the War Over Judges? - There's new evidence the Democrats' strategy is backfiring. By Byron York

I'm still not convinced voters actually care about this, regardless of the numbers cited in the article. Even with Justice Moore, gay marriage cases, pledge, etc. I don't think people think about judges much. It's a lawyer thing. And even if they did, I'm not sure they'd notice the differences between a "Republican" judge vs. a "Democratic" judge in any area other than crim. When Bush says he wants "Strict Constructionists," I think the public's mindset is either "hmm, that has kind of a fascist ring to it, so it must be conservative" or "huh?"

I think the best the Republicans can gain from this judge stuff, in voting terms, is dub the Democrats "strict obstructionists" during election time, which makes them seem petty. People don't like pettiness. Plus, "strict obstructionists" is clever and I came up with it so that's that.

UPDATE: Sen. Feinstein is blocking almost all of Bush's nominees to get a Democrat on the Energy Commission. It's not a permanent block, just a hold, but since the Senate's session is almost over, these nominations would be held over to next term.

Diane Feinstein is one serious politician. She often crosses party lines, but can also be a hard-core partisan if she wants to. I think she has higher ambitions. A senator with higher ambitions, how could that be, you say? I'm just that good.

No comments:

Blog Archive