Bush picks Roberts to succeed Rehnquist - Yahoo! News
Bush picks Roberts to succeed Rehnquist - Yahoo! News
I am really upset right now. I've been a republican for years. When I was in college, I stood outside the voting booths and handed out cards for Jesse Helms and Charles Taylor. I had met and talked with both of them and their opponents and were convinced that they were the right ones for the job.
I have never been a straight party voter, I'd rather know about someone before they get my vote. But lately, I'm really getting frustrated with our system.
Historically in America, unless you are part of the main parties, you won't get elected. The problem that I've seen, particularly lately, is that both the Republican and Democratic parties have their own agendas...and those agendas aren'twhat most of the American people want (at least the hopes of the various people I've talked to). What I've seen is that when most of us talk in a nonthreatening setting, our political views have a lot in common with each other, even if we disagree in some areas. But our political parties seem to be based more on the differences instead of the similiarities.
What does this have to do with the website that I thumbed? Not a lot. I'm just getting frustrated at the way our government is going. I voted for Bush and I'd probably do it again if I were given the same two choices. I'm from NC and I wouldn't vote for John Edwards. I think it's rather telling that even given the opportunity to have someone from NC in the White House, NC still voted predominantly for Bush. But choosing between two options on either end of a scale isn't always the best way to choose. Perhaps it's time for a new party in the US, one that truely is a party of the people, for the people, and by the people.
And now I'll actually talk about the page and what brought all this on....Today President Bush said that Roberts is his choice for Chief Justice. Roberts, the canidate that both Republicans and Democrats have complained about. Even Ann Coulter (a very vocal Republican writer) has complained about him.
As the South recovers from Katrina and the rest of us do what we can to help and wait to see what changes the future will bring, Bush could have taken a step that would have shown the world that racism is becoming a thing of the past in the US, that equal rights are alive and active by naming Clarence Thomas to the role of Chief Justice. Justice Thomas has the credientals, he's proven as a Justice, and he has a record that Bush should like. Naming Thomas as Chief Justice would be good for the Nation, and a good move politically for both Bush and the Republican party.
Instead, Bush's move has me shaking my head, wondering "What was he thinking?" I've been against believing that Bush had a political agenda. I don't want to believe it, honestly. But this move really makes no sense otherwise.
I am really upset right now. I've been a republican for years. When I was in college, I stood outside the voting booths and handed out cards for Jesse Helms and Charles Taylor. I had met and talked with both of them and their opponents and were convinced that they were the right ones for the job.
I have never been a straight party voter, I'd rather know about someone before they get my vote. But lately, I'm really getting frustrated with our system.
Historically in America, unless you are part of the main parties, you won't get elected. The problem that I've seen, particularly lately, is that both the Republican and Democratic parties have their own agendas...and those agendas aren'twhat most of the American people want (at least the hopes of the various people I've talked to). What I've seen is that when most of us talk in a nonthreatening setting, our political views have a lot in common with each other, even if we disagree in some areas. But our political parties seem to be based more on the differences instead of the similiarities.
What does this have to do with the website that I thumbed? Not a lot. I'm just getting frustrated at the way our government is going. I voted for Bush and I'd probably do it again if I were given the same two choices. I'm from NC and I wouldn't vote for John Edwards. I think it's rather telling that even given the opportunity to have someone from NC in the White House, NC still voted predominantly for Bush. But choosing between two options on either end of a scale isn't always the best way to choose. Perhaps it's time for a new party in the US, one that truely is a party of the people, for the people, and by the people.
And now I'll actually talk about the page and what brought all this on....Today President Bush said that Roberts is his choice for Chief Justice. Roberts, the canidate that both Republicans and Democrats have complained about. Even Ann Coulter (a very vocal Republican writer) has complained about him.
As the South recovers from Katrina and the rest of us do what we can to help and wait to see what changes the future will bring, Bush could have taken a step that would have shown the world that racism is becoming a thing of the past in the US, that equal rights are alive and active by naming Clarence Thomas to the role of Chief Justice. Justice Thomas has the credientals, he's proven as a Justice, and he has a record that Bush should like. Naming Thomas as Chief Justice would be good for the Nation, and a good move politically for both Bush and the Republican party.
Instead, Bush's move has me shaking my head, wondering "What was he thinking?" I've been against believing that Bush had a political agenda. I don't want to believe it, honestly. But this move really makes no sense otherwise.
posted by Teeg | 8:50 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home