In the last five years we have seen an effort by the current government to control the American judicial system by the appointment of ideologically selected judges. The unprecedented attempt to make the administration of justice the instrument of ideology is incompatible with the Constitution of the Republic whose flag we salute.So, what, exactly, is supposed to be "unprecedented" here? Democratic presidents also try to select ideologically compatible judges. Nothing new here. Sen. Hart continues:
The unprecedented submission of social policy, and foreign policy in the Middle East, to religious fundamentalists violates the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution...Now, the people involved in Bush's foreign policy, like Sec. Rice or Sec. Rumsfeld, are generally not "religious fundamentalists." Sen. Hart makes no effort to explain how our Middle East policy is supposed to be abridging First Amendment rights: it is not like there is a shortage of criticism.
Gary Hart may feel threatened by the Bush administration but to make a convincing case, he needs to provide more substance. Otherwise, it just appears to be paranoia.