Bring It On!

Four Reasons Clinton Supporters Should Vote for Obama

June 5th, 2008 | by Steve O |

The blanks;

1. John Paul Stevens (age 88) Appointed by Gerald Ford — overruled Furman v. Georgia and again allowed the use of the death penalty in the United States.

2. Antonin Scalia (age 72) Appointed by Reagan — Believes in a strict interpretation of the Constitution and given the chance would overturn Roe v. Wade.

3. Anthony Kennedy (age 71) Appointed by Reagan — In favor of expanding Constitutional rights to cover sexual orientation but did consider overturning Roe v. Wade.

4. Ruth Bader Ginsburg (age 75) Appointed by Clinton — Joined Justice Steven’s dissent in Bush v. Gore by stating, “Although we may never know with complete certainty the identity of the winner of this year’s Presidential election, the identity of the loser is perfectly clear. It is the Nation’s confidence in the judge as an impartial guardian of the rule of law.”

As Liberals, Democrats and Independents we finally have a chance to change the course of the Supreme Court in November please think twice about casting a protest vote for McCain. This election is not about any one individual losing a nomination, it’s about winning a secure future for our children long after our current leaders have passed on.


Many people wonder how Obama can make a difference in just four years and the answer lies in the upcoming vacancies in the Supreme Court. By appointing Liberal minded Justices Obama will create change for the next 20 years and secure our freedoms to choose, our freedoms of privacy and finally we will have a chance to keep the Supreme Court balanced.

  1. 12 Responses to “Four Reasons Clinton Supporters Should Vote for Obama”

  2. By Cranky Liberal on Jun 5, 2008 | Reply


  3. By Craig R. Harmon on Jun 5, 2008 | Reply

    Uh, yeh, I do. Why do you ask? ;-)

    My reasons why are over at Cranky’s post, Number 1 Reason Hillary Supporters Should Vote For Obama. No point going through it all again.

  4. By Steve O on Jun 5, 2008 | Reply


    Why do you hate freedom?

  5. By Craig R. Harmon on Jun 5, 2008 | Reply

    I don’t. I like the Constitution. I don’t like Supreme Court Justices who think they can just make stuff up as they go along because they think that’s what the Constitution SHOULD say and pretend that what they’ve decided is what the Constitution has always said all along. If you read my comments at Cranky’s post, you will see that my position is about protecting rights that the federal government has no business, constitutionally, meddling in and the dangers to freedom that the vote I would assume that you are proposing to cast is a danger to those freedoms.

    Like I said, no point in going through it all again.

  6. By Steve O on Jun 5, 2008 | Reply


    There is a simple solution to what you may be referring to as judicial activism. It’s called bullet proof legislation. If our fucking politicians wrote laws that left no room for interpretation than you wouldn’t need courts to interpret them.

    But that will never happen so the Supreme Court is an essential and vital part of our society and should not be taken likely when appointing someone to it.

    I’m somewhat convinced that Bush stole the election just to get a chance to appoint the judges he did because those appointees linger looong after he’s dead and buried.

  7. By Craig R. Harmon on Jun 5, 2008 | Reply

    I’m not sure how simple it is to write what you call “bullet proof legislation” even if the resulting legislation did not have to be a compromise in order to satisfy a sufficient number of legislators of differing views but I do agree that a Supreme Court is essential and that appointments to it should never be taken lightly. I think we just disagree about what type of Justices and judicial rulings do more damage to greater liberty. My view of which can be read at Cranky’s similar post.

    I’m certainly not arguing for eliminating the Supreme Court…although, to do so would be a lesser imposition on liberties since that would leave many courts, each closer to the people whose lives their rulings affect. Still, I do think that there are some legal rulings that MUST be universal throughout the union so eliminating the SCOTUS would probably be a bad thing.

  8. By Jersey McJones on Jun 5, 2008 | Reply

    I’ll tell ya’ what we need to get rid of - ELECTED JUDGES. It is perhaps the most perverted form of justice on the planet.

    And you wanna talk about judicial activism??? The Ledbetter decision was about the creepiest, lowliest, scumbagiest, illegal decision in our history!


  9. By Alex on Jun 5, 2008 | Reply

    It seems to me that you have made a sufficiently compelling argument for me, who is a Clinton supporter, to vote for Obama.

  10. By Steve O on Jun 5, 2008 | Reply

    Thanks Alex, it really, really isn’t 100% about the candidate. We need this win, this country needs this win. This is no time to be casting protest votes.

    Plus, I am obviously not a Hillary supporter but I would have voted for her in November for the same four reasons stated above.

  11. By mr bigstuff on Jun 5, 2008 | Reply

    way to work alex. see, i finally learned how to spell.

  12. By Alex on Jun 5, 2008 | Reply

    I’m glad we’re finally in agreement, Mr. Bigstuff! I capitalized your name because it seemed necessary given the suggested prowess therein :)

  1. 1 Trackback(s)

  2. Jun 5, 2008: Four Reasons Clinton Supporters Should Vote for Obama « E Verteta’s Weblog

Post a Comment