1. How long before the demacrats try to for impeachment?

2. Will Micheal Moore still win the oscar for best documentry ( frenheit 911) now that it failed to bring down President Bush?

For you who lean left, Dogger, SF, I suggest you stay away from high places and sharp objects for awhile and think Hillary 08, Hillary 08. :D

Nope Skip,

I've reevaluated my position on many matters. Time for our govt. to start solving some problems. hey what's that.... well there's the 5000 pound gorilla of a national debt........ what's that baby boomers are going to retire soon...... what 280,000 dollars per household in America. Glad there's a republican majority in the legislature and a republican president. They will cut our taxes. We will grow out of the national debt. Hell that's been their answer for every other economic challenge. We'll trickle those dollars down to the workin folk.

I got the bug man Delay in the house. Frist the miracle worker in the senate. W leading with the guidance of a higher power. Big Things.............. HIGH EXPECTATIONS FOR OUR COUNTRY the next four years!!!!

Skipuno Wrote:1. How long before the demacrats try to for impeachment?

No. 1, we can't. You guys run Washington. Can't blame us anymore. The burden of leadership is yours. Good luck and God bless.

No. 2 - I think Democrats respect the constitution too much to do to Bush what Republicans did to Clinton.

Schadenfreude Wrote:No. 2 - I think Democrats respect the constitution too much to do to Bush what Republicans did to Clinton.

What part of "judicial activism" are you ignoring, and why exactly have judicial appointees been log-jammed?

Skipuno Wrote:2. Will Micheal Moore still win the oscar for best documentry ( frenheit 911) now that it failed to bring down President Bush?

I think it's worth noting that "The Passion of the Christ" is not frequently mentioned for the Oscar.

So much for tolerance and diversity within the Academy.

Please define "judicial activism" and defend your ideological position on judicial activism with the Supreme Court coming up with a new equal protection right in the Bush/Gore recount. My experience has been that conservatives define "judicial activism" as a ruling with which they disagree.

Judicial activism = Roe v. Wade, i.e. finding a "right" in the Constitution that hadn't existed for the first couple hundred years of its existence.

The equal protection clause is firmly established and was clear-cut in the case of the attempt by Gore to steal the election. Gore only wanted to recount the three most liberal leaning counties in Florida. Bush said fine, if we are going to have a recount let's adhere to the EPC and recount the whole state.

So you agree then that federal courts have a duty to interpret state law in light of the federal constitution.