Dig Deeper Texas

For all those Clinton supporters who swear that they won’t support Obama and would vote for McCain instead–get a grip. Yes, the media has treated Clinton outrageously, and I’m sure you could probably find some sexist comments from the Obama camp. But to not vote Democrat or to vote for McCain instead is not going to help the situation.

Clinton herself touts her experience in getting things done in Washington and I’m pretty sure she doesn’t do it by voting with the Republicans whenever the Democratic caucus doesn’t go her way.

If it weren’t for one significant issue, I’d say go ahead and vote for McCain. In fact, I think it might be better for the Democrats if McCain were the next president. Why? Because getting out of Iraq is going to be ugly no matter how you do it. And not only will a Democratic president get blamed, but the FIRST female or black president will get blamed. Can’t you just hear it? See, I told you you couldn’t trust a _______ to be president.

So what’s the significant issue? Federal judicial appointments. Take the Ledbetter case:

Dahlia Lithwick: Lilly Ledbetter and the wage gap | Dallas Morning News | News for Dallas, Texas | Opinion: Points

Lilly Ledbetter worked at Goodyear Tire in Atlanta for almost 20 years before she got anonymous tip: She was making $6,500 less than her lowest-paid male colleague.She sued under Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act and won – until the case made its way to the Supreme Court. The justices ruled that the clock for the statute of limitations on wage discrimination begins running when the employer first makes the decision to discriminate; it does not run for all the subsequent months – or in this case, years – that the disparate paychecks are mailed. Justice Samuel Alito, writing for the court, found that Ms. Ledbetter was time-barred from filing her discrimination suit because it took more than 180 days after she first got stiffed to discover that it was due to her gender.

I’m sorry, I go with that she was discriminated against with every paycheck and when was her last paycheck? Claiming the 180 days started with the first pay check is a convenient way of protecting corporations from accountability. Of course, McCain claims the decision just keeps those greedy trial lawyers (like John Edwards?) from making money of honest corporations.

John McCain and Barack Obama: Two visions of the Supreme Court - Los Angeles Times

The Ledbetter case illustrates the difference between Obama and McCain when it comes to judges. Obama sharply criticized the decision, saying the conservative justices ignored new discrimination she suffered with each unfairly low paycheck. McCain defended the decision and called it a defeat for trial lawyers who sought to sue companies.

Two of the more liberal (relatively speaking) justices will probably be leaving during the next president’s term and you want John McCain to appoint their replacements?

In McCain’s Court: Comment: The New Yorker

Successful politicians know how to attract attention, and how to avoid it, so it’s worth noting that John McCain chose to give his speech about the future of the judiciary on May 6th, a day when the political world was preoccupied with the Democratic primaries in Indiana and North Carolina. It is significant, too, that Senator McCain spoke mainly in generalities, rather than about such specific issues as abortion, affirmative action, and the death penalty. But even if he hoped to sneak the speech past a distracted public, and have its coded references deciphered only by the activists who were its primary target, its message should not be lost on anyone. McCain plans to continue, and perhaps even accelerate, George W. Bush’s conservative counter-revolution at the Supreme Court…..

The question, as always with McCain these days, is whether he means it. Might he really be a “maverick” when it comes to the Supreme Court? The answer, almost certainly, is no. The Senator has long touted his opposition to Roe, and has voted for every one of Bush’s judicial appointments; the rhetoric of his speech shows that he is getting his advice on the Court from the most extreme elements of the conservative movement. With the general election in mind, McCain had to express himself with such elaborate circumlocution because he knows that the constituency for such far-reaching change in our constellation of rights is small, and may be shrinking.

McCain’s Justice Should Scare Liberals - A Capital View (usnews.com)

Conservatives frequently remind their voters that a president’s appointments of like-minded jurists to the Supreme Court are a serious consideration on Election Day.As a counterpoint, voters of a moderate or liberal bent should be equally or even more concerned given the makeup of the current nine justices.

Sen. John McCain, the presumptive GOP nominee, delivered a speech earlier this month that was relegated to many back pages. He told an audience that his nominations to the court would be in the mold of Chief

Justice John Roberts and Associate Justice Samuel Alito. Both were named by President Bush.

That should send shivers down the spines of those who have seen Roberts and Alito line up with justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas as a solid bloc of conservative votes.

Now will someone please explain to me why it’s more important for Clinton supporters to vote for John McCain to demonstrate their principles or loyalty to Clinton rather than prevent a complete conservative take over of the Supreme Court and federal judiciary?

Filed under: 2008 election