Thought just occurred to me about Bush's hypocrisy re: "activist judges"

[Catholic Sensation]

Bush said he's for this constitutional ban on gay marriage because of cities and "activist judges" creating laws at their whim. Now I don't support what San Francisco is doing because, and I hate to quote him, as Arnold Scwarzenegger said "what if cities want to create their own gun laws allowing assault weapons?" But this post isn't about gay marriage and whether or not it should be legal. This is about the absolutely blatant hypocrisy of what Bush is "worried" about.

Bush has made it obvious that he's a lunatic coming from the far right. Whether it's getting aroused by invading other countries, lowering taxes on the rich while lying to the poor, or simply trying to remove a woman's right to choose, Bush is the most right wing chief executive in this country's history. Bush's problem isn't activist judges per se, only left wing judges and city officials. He has no problem when it comes to right wing activist judges. No, he has no problem circumventing congress to install Charles Pickering, a segregationist and anti-abortion judge. I would say his position on the law of the land regarding segregation and abortion could be viewed as "activist." But no. If someone realizes that preventing homosexual couples from simply getting married is disgusting (and not to mention idiotic), then they're activists out trying to destroy the basis of civilization!

Bush's position on activist judges is dependent on how close to 1930s Germany their positions are.

That's my rant.

[Catholic Sensation]

1. selfless kick

:)

[orwell]

2. Code Words

"Activist judges" is coding. Activist conjures the frame of 60's radicals. He is in essence speaking to his authoritarian camp about their deeply held beliefs about the threat of change, the dangers of freedom if you will—the hemp smoking hippies storming the gates.

Blow up the frame.

O