stand for something

there should be no "litmus test" to determine the eligibility of a person to sit on the supreme court. a person's religious or political views should not interfere with a proper interpretation of the constitution as it lives and breathes today. anyone nominated to the supreme court should not be done so to mollify one's political base, however conservative, or liberal, it is. no one who cannot view the constitution in a modern light, and with moderation, should be considered for the supreme court. in nominating someone based on whether his views will satisfy his party's conservative base, president bush has undermined the nomination process. a democrat filibuster in the senate based on anything but the nominee's qualifications is also a counterproductive, and i would say improper, response to the present situation. i am disappointed that bush has again catered to his radial right political base rather than try to embrace the middle and nominate a more moderate judge for the supreme court. i am disappointed that the republican-led senate refuses to exert even a modicum of oversight on the bush administration. this is not how the system of checks and balances is supposed to work.

i'm sure a brilliant thinker in the democrat ranks can flesh out these views with strong arguments and better support than i have time to give today. i think in handling the alito nomination, the democrats need to get away from the 'protecting roe v. wade' argument and focus more on alito's interpretation of the constitution. what i absolutely reject is any strict interpretation of the original document. erasing 200 years of precedent and established court decisions is ludicrous, as is literally interpreting a document intended to be flexible and thus read flexibly. if this is alito's approach, he is unfit to sit on the supreme court.

i think the american people need to wake up and realize what hypocrites the republicans are. when the shoe is on the other foot, when the democrats are in power again, the republicans will be happy their judges are 'legislating from the bench' and will be horrified by the thought of the senate eliminating the filibuster on judicial nominations. or, if they eliminate it before then, they'll be horrified that they can no longer block the radically liberal judicial candidates a democratic president nominates. they'll call for its return, and the democrats will point out who did what. what the democrats need is a charismatic candidate who stands for something, rather than against someone. instead of someone who says 'hey, at least i'm not george bush', we need someone who lays out a bold, exciting plan for america's future, one that gives americans something to believe in again. one that brushes aside all the corruption and pork barrel politics to form a government that really does work for the people again. i know this hasn't happened for a long time, if ever, but it's time for change. it's time for someone to stand up and take charge. it's time for the democrats to stand for something.

until they do, i can't vote for them. until they do, the republicans will run the country. until they do, we'll keep sinking into deeper debt and worsening social conditions. until the democrats take charge and give us a reason to support them, this country is going to rot.