It takes some nerve for a guy under a legal cloud to address a crowd of lawyers, but then nobody ever accused Karl Rove of lacking nerve. The White House deputy chief of staff, who is not yet free and clear in the CIA leak investigation, predictably lashed out at "judicial imperialism" and "legislating from the bench" during a Thursday night speech to the Federalist Society. More revealing and troubling was a joke he made about the society, which he said has so "thoroughly infiltrated the White House" that Chief of Staff Andrew Card had asked him to announce a staff meeting after dinner. Is it appropriate for any one group, whatever its ideology or special interest, to accrue such power in a presidential administration?
Posted by Rhonda Holman
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- XXX on Open thread 11/23
- donndublin on Open thread 11/23
- donndublin on Open thread 11/23
- Regular on Moore has had enough of House
- donndublin on Open thread 11/23
- Regular on Open thread 11/23
- okobserver on Let immigrants run
- Monkeyhawk on Open thread 11/23
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/23
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/23
18 Comments
Why not?
The Federalist Society published their plan to invade Iraq as a beachhead to recolonize the middle-east in 1995. Two years after getting into the White House, they got their wish. 9/11’s terrorism was just a handy excuse; they were going in anyway.
It may be unseemly for the White House to be so openly ‘Federalist’ but they are all certainly free to hold their own views. Presidents and their staff belong to overtly partisan organizations called ‘parties’. Staff members might belong to other organizations like the freemasons, the NRA, the KKK, the Audubon Society, the John Birch Society, and…(fill in organization).
What we want in those we elect and in their staffs is the ability to be informed by the views of others and in good conscience do what they believe is best. What they believe may indeed be slanted (after all membership in a party already indicates you have particular and ’slanted’ views).
My prior post should in no way be construed to mean that I think this administration has acted wisely or in good conscience.
Why is it that we never know who these people really are until their last term? They argue that they were elected just as they are and that people want their ideas. I think that they twist and lie to get into their office and we just can’t see them for what they really are until they let their guard down. This is what we are seeing now with the current administration. Immediately after the 2004 election they let their guard down because there was no reason to pretend anymore, they feel they have complete power.They are trying to exert that power on the one free thinking, non-lobbied branch of government, the judicial branch.Is this not incredibly scary to most people? Or do most people not care or not know how imperative this situation is?
Apathy rules in this country, do you have any idea how many people tell me that they “just don’t pay attention” and never even so much as read the newspaper because “it’s too depressing”? My sister-in-law is 57 yrs old and has never voted in her entire life. Many American’s are more concerned about who is dating Brad, who’s going to be the next “American Idol”, and other such mindless nonsense.”The way for evil to reign is for good people to do nothing”.
I agree Damoon, apathy is THE greatest evil.
I guess the question at hand is are we really ready for self-government?
“Is it appropriate for any one group, whatever its ideology or special interest, to accrue such power in a presidential administration?”
Like the Democrats and Republicans aren’t just another pair of groups. The difference is that those two write the laws, appoint the judges, and control the military/police.
” It takes some nerve for a guy under a legal cloud to address a crowd of lawyers”
Actually it doesn’t take nerve for a Zionist pig like “Rove the law-breaker.”
Rove is so desperate for recognition, he’ll do just about anything. Right now he’s flipping us off, for managing to avoid the law.
” It takes some nerve for a guy under a legal cloud to address a crowd of lawyers”
Excuse me, point of information? Was Rove indicted? Naw, I didn’t think so.
Not yet… a new grand jury has been empaneled and the special prosecutor has not indicated whether Mr. Rove is still under investigation or not.
Are you guys really that dumb?
The Federalist Society is a Constitutional Law group.
They took no position on the Iraq war.
I wonder how many ACLU lawyers were in the Clinton White house and if the Eagle cared about that.
Who is John Galt, and why did Atlas shrug?Details at 11.
Good one, TRACY! I suspect not a few of the regular posters will get that one. Some won’t, but there’s always Google. . .
I prefer Jefferson.—–
I’m less concerned about the role of the Federalist Society than the results.
A rubber-stamp judiciary is a prescription for tyranny.
Tracy,Thankfully, John Galt is alive and living with us here at this and many other blogs.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Characters_in_Atlas_Shrugged#John_Galt
I ayn much into rand’em ideology, but I would guess “John Galt” is.
{shrugs}