alito, wiretaps and why cruelty to animals never pays...

here we go again...another round of bickering and posturing over a nominee for the supreme court. another week of democrats and republicans dodging the real reason they will/won't vote to confirm alito...more "dodging" of ludicrous questions by a judicial nominee who shouldn't be expected to answer them anyways. for once, wouldn't it be nice to hear a news conference go something like this...

joe senator (D-State A): there is no question that judge alito is qualified, the ABA told me so. he went to good schools, is a talented legal mind, writes clear opinions which support his conclusions, has 15 years of experience on the federal bench, is a family man, and i hear a hell of a guy. but there is a problem....see, NARAL just contributed $10,000 to my reelection fund and they seem to think he is the antichrist and that his confirmation would immediately mean abortions would be illegal and punishable by public disembowelment, sending civilization spiralling back into the stone age...and i really need that money...so in the interest of special interests, i cannot vote for him because he is conservative.

jane senator (R-State B): there is no question that judge alito is qualified, the ABA told me so. he went to good schools, is a talented legal mind, writes clear opinions which support his conclusions, has 15 years of experience on the federal bench, is a family man, and i hear a hell of a guy. but that really isn't why i like him...hell, that could describe a lot of judges i wouldn't dream of voting for. see, the christian coalition just contributed $10,000 to my reelection fund...and they seem to think that if Roe is not overturned this year the gays will take over the world, child molesters will run rampant and baby murderers will dance with glee over the bodies of their victims...and i really need that money, so i have to vote for him because he is conservative (plus the big GW told me to).

wouldn't some honesty in this conversation be nice for once? stop "dodging" the issue senators and admit that "judicial philosphy" means political idealogy, specifically abortion. (and message to democrats...making abortion cut and dry issue is bad politics and is costing you votes every year).

as for judicial nominees "dodging" questions (a favorite of senators on tv)...those questions should never be asked of a judge anyways. i understand that most senators are not the brightest folk (if they were they would be making more money in the private sector instead of trying to vote themselves pay raises)...but do we really want a judge to spell out to the world exactly how he/she will rule on any case that comes before him in the future. i mean...why even bother having a supreme court then, why not just set up 9 slots and have congress decide where each will fall on all hotbutton issues...it will save a lot of money, and get rid of a bunch of lawyers.

more talk of wiretaps in the news...i have a suggestion for a system to be used rather than the accountable to noone administration wiretaps. how about this...we put together a secret panel of judges who meet in secret, hear cases in secret, and make decisions in secret. fedeal law enforcement agencies can come before them and say they need wiretaps because they can't figure it out otherwise and these are really bad people...then that court grants a "warrant" for wiretaps approximately 99% of the time without the public having any clue about any of it. would that make you feel better? because that is the system the administration sidestepped...doesn't seem like such a big deal anymore does it? hell, it's really just a money saver...

some old man in new mexico caught a mouse in his home and decided to dispose of it...and by "dispose of it" i mean place it on a pile of burning leaves while it was still alive. well, the mouse got even by running back into his home, fur ablaze...the house was eventually gutted by the fire. payback's a bitch...

if we're searching for peace how come we still believe in hatred as the catalyst...