weee, a few things
Xie, you're correct. I understand where Collin Powell is coming from, and can respect that. I can also see how in the Bush admin he has been used. Along with his comment about not letting them bastards run him from office, I also remember reading that his popularity among the American public was greater then Bush's...
tbh, I had thought of sending him a mailing (not that it would ever have reached him anyhow...usually it just goes to the secretarial staff or what not, and from there, the garbage pail. One might get a nice canned reply on official stationary, but otherwise... In the end, I didn't...and it would be something he would have to come to on his own.
I would have hoped that he could make the leap to understand that, given a republican form of government paints these as representatives that are
supposed to be representing us (aka a government of the people, by the people, and for the people), the ultimate duty is to nation and the American people who they're supposed to serve. I do understand where he's comming from though, and do respect that aspect of things.
2. Let me re-itterate
Sazar said:
in law one thing is important above all.... precedence... and thanks to the florida supreme court... their stupidity has opened pandora's box.. on both sides...
I took Constitutional law many years back. Stari decisis (or precedent) is not the only doctrine of legal interpretation. There are some others, such as looking at the intent of the law (aka trying to get into the minds of the authors and understand the intent behind the words), and some others. But precedent is a very important one, and does weigh into things heavily. The court system, typically speaking has tended to be more reserved/conservative, and much slower to change then other branches of the government.
Reversals of decisions/positions have occured of sorts (Brown vs. Board of Education against the backdrop of Plessy vs. Ferguson for instance). But even there, the change was smaller then the media made it out to be, looking at the actual words of the 2 decisions (as well as the disenting view in Plessy itself). This could be the topic of another discussion, so suffice it to say, courts don't tend to just do an abut face on a position already established by precident, very quickly, or to a greater degree then deemed necessary. Precident is important.
3. Whoever wins the election, I think the president will very possibly have certain challenges over the next 4 years. I doubt seriously it would be seen as a picnic by 2008
- Whoever gets it, will have the current situation in Iraq, the insurgency, anarchy, etc to deal with
- World public opinion had shown very much against Bush. After the "you're with us, or with the terrorists" rhetoric, I could well see foreign governments wanting certain concessions, before re-establishing certain bridges which had already been burned. I can only hope, if this is the case, the concessions they seek, will in fact be for the good of their own people, who they themselves are supposed to serve, and not something outragious which benefits no one...
- If the elections don't leave a decisive victory, but leave the sort of taste in people's mouth we saw in 2000, I'm not convinced that the country (and to the pount it's people) wouldn't remain just as divided after the elections, as they are currently on certain matters... And if the division per chance should grow?
Just to name a few
