Two points need making on judicial philosophy. First a question: what happened to the judicial philosophy question? A good question would be, is it trickle down or bottoms up?
These are two points of departure here and almost a pun in that there is not really a difference with the slip of a key, but now that there is a new nominee there is still a question surrounding the philosophy or is it in the original intent of the nomination which should hinge on one question? Is a corporation a person?
Further: Is there equal protection under the law, in particular how does citizenship and homeland security come into play and more originally how do these promote the general welfare as noted in the preamble of the constitution?
Philosophy or politics? Neither are bad, neither are games. Play them. Do the hard work that will always be needed to keep the solutions from being a flip or a flop.
Going back to some other word games, I think of the forum, a battle, a debate, and 4 "M"s; money, mechanics, media and message(not in any particular order) is not just for ’em.
No comments:
Post a Comment