I've been remiss...

in that I've never mentioned my distress about the fact that most voters don't seem to realize that the President has the power to appoint many, many, many judges - including the Supremies.  Slate, however, has corrected my omission with a great article that asks that very question.  Why don't people seem to realize (or care) that even though we can boot out the President every four years, judicial appointments are FOR DECADES.

And the judges are who determine how laws are enforced.  All that legislation passed by Congress?  Guess what?  It's interpreted by all those judges - including the Supremies.  So we can get the good legislation produced by Congress and the Prez but if the judges interpret it differently, we're stuck with that interpretation - just as we were stuck with the Supremies' decision to appoint Bush in 2000. 

I'm the first to admit that I have been pretty darn slack with regard to 'judge selection activism' but my new political resolution is to pay more attention to who's going where.  Of course, this will probably require some rudimentary knowledge of the court system but that's too bad - I'll have to take the time to learn...