Very few people have written as much on the issue of
conservative judges over the past ten years than I have. So this is
important to me. Gingrich is absolutely right to challenge judges.
But as Kelly’s question indicated, his approach (on some fronts)
does indeed “dangerously” alters the constitutional balance of
power.
But Gingrich hit a home run with his answer. He sounded
terrific. He’s good at debating. He doesn’t back down. And he’s
great at the demagoguery, such as attacking “lawyers” while (again)
portraying himself as a great historian. No, what he is, is a
politician who is smart enough to sound like an academic when it
does him good.
Meanwhile, Bachmann also did well when she chimed in on the
question.
Ron Paul was right to reject Gingrich’s idea of subpoenaing
judges before Congress. Dead right. He called it “a real affront to
the separation of powers.” He knows the COnstitution better than
Historian Newt does.
Oldefarte| 12.16.11 @ 3:26PM
The one true solution to the question of judges is to elect the best, most conservative Republicans as senators, representatives and presidents [and thereafter allow same to appoint the most appropriate judges]!!!!!