Activist judges put gay marraige issue in election

Stanley Kurtz:

We now know why Karl Rove left the White House. Obviously, it takes time to travel around the country using hypnosis to instill a bizarre political death wish into liberal Democratic judges. Either that, or the gay marriage issue keeps getting politicized, not because of Karl Rove, but because activist judges insist on being...well, active. So now we’ve got a new front-burner issue in Iowa.

On balance, this would certainly seem to help Mitt Romney, who rightly criticized the ruling as "another example of an activist court and unelected judges trying to redefine marriage and disregard the will of the people as expressed through Iowa’s Defense of Marriage Act." Romney also rightly went on to pointed out the need for a Federal Marriage Amendment.

Neither Fred Thompson nor Rudy Guiliani favor a federal amendment, yet I think each could benefit from clarifying his stance on this issue. As one of his "twelve commitments" Rudy Guiliani criticizes activist judges and promises to appoint strict constructionist. Well then, Rudy should unequivocally criticize the Iowa ruling and use it as an occasion to emphasize his determination to appoint strict constructionist judges. That would be one important way for Guiliani to reassure conservatives who might disagree with him on some issues, but who nonetheless see him as someone who can win–and follow up a win with good judicial appointments.

...

Both Giulani and Fred Thompson have gone the federalism route on this and other issues. I see this being a bigger problem for he Democrats who oppose statewide constitutional amendments on the issue which claiming to oppose gay marriage. This is like some of their opposition to abortion while also opposing doing anything to regulate it.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Should Republicans go ahead and add Supreme Court Justices to head off Democrats

Washington Post: Some Democrats eye adding more justices to the Supreme Court to change its ideological bent The once-remote idea has gained the attention of liberals angered by the GOP push to remake the federal courts. Probably the easy way to defeat this court-packing scheme is for Trump to propose doing the same thing now.  It would lead to Democrat denunciations and claims that it would be wrong, thereby blowing up any attempt by them in the unfortunate event of Democrats winning a presidential election.
Read more

29 % of companies say they are unlikely to keep insurance after Obamacare

Conn Carroll: A new survey of 368 midsize to large companies found that 29% of them are considering terminating their active employee health care plans when Obamacare is full implemented in 2014. Only 71% of employers surveyed said they did not expect to drop their health coverage, while 20% said they did not know and 9% said they were planning to exit. The latest survey, conducted by Towers Watson, echoes an ealier survey by McKinsey & Co. finding that 30% of private-sector employers were planning to drop their employee health insurance coverage by 2014. When the Congressional Budget Office crunched Obamacare's spending numbers, they estimated that only 7% of employees currently covered by employer-sponsored plans would lose their plans. ... This means the cost of the health care fiasco will be hundreds of billions more than estimated by the CBO and Congressional Democrat. It is also clear that Obama's pledge that you could keep your health care plan if you wanted t
Read more