Third-party advocates -- are you paying attention to this ?
I am not a third party advocate, I am a conservative abandoned by the Republican Party when George and the Neo-Conservatives seized control in 2000.
I have no confidence, at all, that Bush's appointees would be any better than Kerry's.
If Bush himself really was a strict constructionist, then he might appoint strict constructionists to the SC. However, his record clearly shows he is not a strict constructionist... he loosely interprets the Constitution anyway he wants.
McCain Feingold is an example of this. If he really believed the first amendment should be literally interpretted, then there is no way he could have supported this law.
The assault weapons ban is another example. If he really believed in the 2nd amendment, he would not be "officially" on record supporting the AWB.
Don't even get me started on the Patriot act... several violations of the Constitution can be found there.
Finally, the extremists here that claim Clinton would get appointed to the SC are either just using scare tactics to get people to vote for Bush or they are just blind.
Any appointee will have to get Senate approval... so if either Clinton was to get nominated by Kerry (which wouldn't happen in the first place), they would get shot down by the confirmation process.
My final point is to consider that the majority of SC justices are liberal... and the majority were also appointed by Republicans. SC justices are not living in a vacuum. Its a lifelong post. There is a tendency for them to become liberal as time goes on.
I do not consider SC appointments a reason to support Bush over Kerry.
