To reiterate (because my last post was unclear).

When a judge rules, they should say "The constitution says the right answer is...."

Now, if you have a good liberal judge, or a good conservative judge, they might finish that sentience differently, because they view what the constitution means differently.

That's ok. They were appointed for there judgement, and if they really interprete something differently, who am I to say how I interprete it is better?

Liu will not come to ruling the same way. He has justified to himself why the constitution should no longer be the measuring bar in which we hold people accountable. That it's just too old a document, and does not represent who we are as a people, and that it shouldn't.

This is the problem with this appointment. Not that he is liberal. Every judge Obama appoints will be liberal, and that's expected.

Also I have to say I find it sad how politicised your judiciary is. You really don't have an independent judiciary at all, it's strongly linked both to the executive and legislative branches which is why you have recognized conservative and liberal wings. You shouldn't, you should just have impartial judges.

Yeah, eh.  I think it has to do with the fact that the federal judges are nominated by the president.

I'm not sure the judiciary would be any less "impartial" however... unless your definition of impartial is conservative.

Ohio is THE swing state, pretty much the perfect equaliberium of Republican and Democrat.  When you run for a Judge in Ohio by LAW nobody is allowed to mention your political leanings and you can run on NOTHING but your decisions as a judge and record in general on crime.

All major judges in Ohio are "Conservative"  people just want conservative judges

"Liberal" judges are in a disadvantage in such a system because well... Liberal judges are the ones who make "new" rulings not consistant with older law.

They're also more likely to let criminals off on technicalities and tend to look weak on crime.

Basically liberal judges tend to lose as far as I can tell because their rulings are things they can be attacked for while you can't really attack the Conservative judge for upholding convention and sending murderers to jail.

Judges shouldn't be elected. They really really shouldn't.

I don't see  how you avoid judges being nothing but political tools otherwise.

At least in a system like Ohio you have to run on the merits of your rulings, rather then the system we have now. 

Just look at how the rest of the Western world does it.

You know, it's actually a lot harder to find judical nomination information then you'd think.

From what I can tell... in the UK... the Judges pick more judges?  I don't see how that helps the situation since the judges we have now would just pick the judges that best suit well... there own views.

Also our Supreme court has an odd number of judges, which means if there is an even liberal and conserative spit they could just deadlock... forevery on every choice.

Like I said before,left wing sounds good,but does bad;seems nice,actually end in a liar.Go research some communist party controlled countries,you will know,more slavery oriented,sacrificing a lot of human rights on behalf of their party's benefit in the name of the people.

AGAIN
FREEDOM life style needs SUPERPOWER to remain and gain.
PEACE needs SUPERPOWER to remain and gain.
Fair rules need SUPERPOWER to remain and gain.
BAD GUYS like Hitler need SUPERPOWER to punish.
Fair rule breakers need SUPERPOWER to punish.
WII BAD Japanese militarism needs SUPERPOWER to punish(not the NEW JAPAN).

Everything is one kind of political result,freedom,slavery,even playing games.

Slavery oriented politcs or Freedom oritented politics.

Every social system kills one kind of people's living style(Slavery killed or Freedom killed),that's why they all get their own enemies.

It's a shame Superpower 2 isn't that popular of a game.  I would kill to play a game of Super Power 2 with all the people on this board just to see the governments everyone creates, how they do, if anyone ends up going to war with anyone else, and where people side.

Would be great fun.

Outside of that... I don't quite understand what your saying starting with AGAIN.

Afterall the USSR was a superpower.

In the other hand

Slavery oriented living style needs SUPERPOWER to remain and gain also in the name of peace and people,but ONLY on ONE party's benefit,and other BIG enough party are already killed off also in the name of peace and people but ONLY on ONE party's benefit.

People fear those kind of thing,but they don't fear freedom living style,then slavery oriented living style begins,since people don't fear FREEDOM living style,so a lot of those one party controlled country's people would more like to attack your FREEDOM living style since they don't get fear from you in the hope of promoting up in the party's system.

GOOD GUYS need SUPERPOWER to punish that is something they won't talk it loud and clear,that's very wise---almost like a BACK-STAB.

Then who gives up its SUPERPOWER,who gives up its living style they are representing and will be influenced by the other SUPERPOWER's way.

But,didn't talk to you anyway.