Gordon Fischer Takes His Ball and Goes Home
- Thursday, June 18, 2009, 8:24
- Krusty Konservative
- 713 views
- 19 comments
My good friend Gordon Fischer, the only man in recent memory to actively campaign for an appointment to serve as the United States Attorney, has decided that he’s done with politics.
I wonder if he’s going to start a new blog called Iowa Boo Hoo?
Seriously, while Gordon is saying all the right things like he needs to focus on his law practice, this is really about him not getting an appointment from the Obama administration. I can’t believe this little temper tantrum is even news worthy.
Todd Dorman doesn’t think Vander Plaats is smarter than a fifth grader.
Ouch.
I know is supporter will continue to blow this stuff off by simply saying that they don’t understand, but this is a problem for the Vander Plaats campaign. Remember, if people read something in the paper or see it on TV, they think its gospel.
Frankly, I don’t see how an executive order leads us to a vote on gay marriage by the people of Iowa. It just leads us to another case in front of the Iowa Supreme Court.
About the Author
Krusty Konservative has written 284 stories on this site.
Herschel Krustofski is the pseudonym for the anonymous author of Krusty Konservative, a blog which focuses on Iowa Politics. Created in February of 2006, Krusty Konservative is the undisputed heavyweight champion of the Iowa blogosphere. Since its conception, Krusty Konservative has never shied from tackling controversial issues, and providing insight to the inner workings of Republican politics in Iowa.
19 Comments on “Gordon Fischer Takes His Ball and Goes Home”
Write a Comment
Gravatars are small images that can show your personality. You can get your gravatar for free today!
You must be logged in to post a comment.
“Frankly, I don’t see how an executive order leads us to a vote on gay marriage by the people of Iowa. It just leads to another case in front of the Iowa Supreme Court.”
BRAVO!!! Finally somebody gets it! Let these words sink in for a minute. For deace and the rest of the kool-aid drinkers out there, this is reality. I know you really don’t want to accept this, but only in fantasyland will what you have prescribed actually work!
“Frankly, I don’t see how an executive order leads us to a vote on gay marriage by the people of Iowa. It just leads us to another case in front of the Iowa Supreme Court.”
Exactly. That executive order they called The Emancipation Proclamation didn’t work either.
Good call Krusty. Nice job Timmy.
Every Republican Candidate for Governor needs to tell us exactly how they will stand up to the court – or go home. Just saying “I support marriage” doesn’t cut it anymore. No matter how much people whine about BVP, and repeat phony talking points about Governors having no power, the cat is out of the bag.
Governors can do something. BVP has a plan. Does anyone else? Not that we’ve heard yet.
But if what BVP is promoting is the executive order, that isn’t going to work for the reasons stated. If he wants to build a coalition to help win back majorities in the House and Senate so it can be brought to a vote, then Hallelujah, we are on the same page!
That’s exactly what he’s been saying. He just understands that at some point there will come a conflict – even after the amendment is passed. At that point in time, we need an executive who will act like it. The executive order is legal and Constitutional. It will help pass the amendment, and it will begin to put the court back in its place.
If someone else has a better plan to stand up to the court, let’s hear it.
Unless someone is willing to say NO to the court, all the energy and effort is wasted. You can have a House and Senate full of Republicans willing to “support” marriage, but until someone is willing to stop the court, the majority is worthless.
Any candidate for Governor who wants to run as a Republican has to be willing to tell us how far they will go to restore the separation of powers and stop a runaway court.
If you want to open the Emancipation can of worms up again, why did it only apply to “slaves held in States that were in rebellion to the Union” and did not free the slaves of Maryland, what is now West Virginia, Missouri, certain Parishes of Louisiana, etc.?
The Executive Order will land before the same court that ruled on this case with probably the same outcome. If you want to actually prevail on this issue, you need a GOP majority or it is a complete waste of time and resources that are needed to help get our fiscal house in order. When you are up to your butt in alligators, it becomes extremely difficult to drain the swamp!
I can’t figure out those who yell and scream about judicial fiat and power, but are so easily willing to subscribe the same powers to the governor (when it suits their particular means). Becareful what you wish for….
Yes, the executive order would probably come before the same supreme court. So what? How are they going to enforce their opinion without a compliant Governor. — Separation of Powers. If the legislature wants to try to impeach a governor who stands up to the court, they are entitled to do that. — separation of powers.
Those legislators then have to answer to the people.
The weakest branch is the court. They can’t make anyone do anything without the help of one of the other branches of government, UNLESS everyone continues to pretend like they run the state!
As long as you are willing to look to the court for validation of your every action, no political majority will make any difference. If the GOP continues to elect folks who bow down to the court, they are going to be completely impotent forever.
Electing a Republican majority that thinks exactly like the democrats, now THAT is a waste of time.
Yes, and those same separation of powers probably would get that Governor impeached if he doesn’t have a majority in the legislature and tries to overrule the court. Exactly then what would that have actually done? All it will accomplish is more unecessary & expensive litigation at a time when the state is in a financial crisis. Trust me, that won’t play well with the majority of the electorate! Why not do what is constitutionally proscribed and introduce an amendment to the Iowa Constitution. The key to that and the rest of the conservative agenda is get the control of the legislative branch back in the hands of the GOP(ie: getting rid of the metaphorical alligators first).
You seem to think there are no alligators in the GOP. If that were the case, the amendment would have passed the Senate several years ago when it went through the House. No, we need a leader who will defend the Constitution – even risk his office to restore the proper separation of powers.
What happens when the court decides the Constitutional Amendment is unconstitutional?
As for the GOP, now is the time do drain that swamp. Just saying “I support marriage,” or “I’ll support an amendment” isn’t going to persuade anyone any more. Even Culver and Obama say they support marriage. Our candidates have to tell us how they will defend the Constitution and marriage from a runaway court.
When you are draining swamps, replacing one soggy mess with another is no improvement.
We have a glut of people on this site disputing over how to combat “gay marriage” and I don’t think most of them even understand people are only gay because they say they are gay. Gay is not sexuality, gay is a political and social term taken on by people who generally accept and live a homosexual lifestyle but even that is not a requirement. Gay is pure identity politics and what we see on a daily basis is people falling into the traps set by these people.
A desire for same sex unions in a state that has no honor when it comes to marriage in the first place and has had none since no fault divorce became the norm is a bit absurd in many ways. To wait until now to get upset that the state was assaulting marriage is like waiting until he thieves have taken your prized possessions and have a 60 day head start on the investigation. We lost the argument on the legitimacy and protection of marriage long ago.
The only battle left is one of rule of law and when if ever are we going to stand up to run amuck government? So it is now should really be a question of what is the best way do to that? Perhaps Bob Vander Plaats has a point perhaps it wouldn’t be the worst thing in the world if we did have that fight in court if it were used as an opportunity to do some education about the constitution and how things are supposed to work?
Ever think of that?
Frankly I don’t know if Steve King’s approach is better or Bob Vander Plaats but I do know this is a confrontation we need to have. It needs to happen and when it does it needs to be used as a teaching moment. I think either approach has a chance of ending up back in court but why are we now so frightened of that? Are some of you that unsure of your beliefs?
Dean, I agree that we need to return to the rule of law but exactly how does giving the Governor absolute imperical authority make it any better? If he can rule by executive order, why not have BVP issue an order banning all abortion? If Culver gets re-elected, do you seriously want him to have that much power? It is the legislative branch that has authority to initiate changing the Constitution and making law, lets work toward the goal of getting back a majority there so we can bring out an amendment and follow the process of law. Dragging an executive order thru the courts is a waste of time and resources that the majority of Iowans will not be happy with!!!
You are getting closer Timmy. “It is the legislative branch that has the authority to initiate changing the Constitution and making law,” but what you seem unwilling to admit is that the court did both of those things in April. That’s unconstitutional, and for a Governor to call them on it is exactly what ought to happen.
We will not be “dragging an executive order through the courts.” Instead, the people need to drag the courts back into the boundaries established in the constitution.
What the majority of Iowans are getting increasingly tired of are the political hacks continuing to insist that all we need to do is trust one party over the other and everything will be ok. We are done measuring the trustworthiness of Republicans against the Democrats.
You can not distract people on this one. Unless the Republicans offer a plan of action, and commit themselves to actually take action, they are no better than the Democrats.
If you want a Republican governor, but don’t like BVP, that’s fine. As I said earlier in this thread, “If someone else has a better plan to stand up to the court, let’s hear it.” Until then, stop trying to undercut the only guy with the nerve to risk his political career to defend the constitution.
Well Timmy it seems you are arguing that we either have to let the courts rule or we don’t have checks and balances but frankly if our only recourse to unconstitutional court rulings is to change the constitution where does that leave us on the checks and balances front?
You know it is far more difficult for us to amend the constitution than it is for the court to violate it by inventing new meanings to our equal protection clause.
The legislature has been slow to act on this for years. When Republicans had control several didn’t believe it was important to seek that amendment at the time when we could have gotten it up for vote so now here we are. I think in a case of a lawless court that wants to say it can just change the meaning of our constitution any time it jolly well pleases maybe an executive order is just the think to get this all out and get it settled. Let’s determine just what the constitution does and does not say on this and figure out who is in the right and who is wrong.
I don’t really care if that is done by the legislature of if the Governor has to get involved as long as it gets settled.
Well Timmy it seems you are arguing that we either have to let the courts rule or we don’t have checks and balances but frankly if our only recourse to unconstitutional court rulings is to change the constitution where does that leave us on the checks and balances front?
You know it is far more difficult for us to amend the constitution than it is for the court to violate it by inventing new meanings to our equal protection clause.
The legislature has been slow to act on this for years. When Republicans had control several didn’t believe it was important to seek that amendment at the time when we could have gotten it up for vote so now here we are. It seems a lot of Republicans in Iowa want to forget that because it’s so much easier to just blame the court or blame the Democrat cowards running the state but the fact remains some Republicans wanted to bring the amendment up when we HAD the majority but others were more than happy to let the court decide. Well Timmy they decided and now here we are. So I would just ask you to keep that in mind when you discuss wining majorities back because if we do win them but put the wrong people in again it won’t get results.
I also think in a case of a lawless court that wants to say it can just change the meaning of our constitution any time it jolly well pleases maybe an executive order is just the thing to get this all out and get it settled. Let’s determine just what the constitution does and does not say on this and figure out who is in the right and who is wrong. If the court ruling was unconstitutional no one is bound to follow it. Too many Republicans seem happy to proceed with this notion that only the court can rule on what is or is not constitutional and that just isn’t the case and certainly was never the intention.
I don’t really care if that is done by the legislature of if the Governor has to get involved as long as it gets settled.
Dean, the Constitution should be difficult to amend, just like we should fear unlimited power being wielded by the whim of a Chief Executive. This is why we don’t have a king!!! As for the legislature being slow to act, IIRC, this latest debate didn’t come up before the court until the dems had taken over the Statehouse. It was the Republicans that passed DOMA in the first place. Tim Gill was very astute and helped to create an almost perfect storm. As far as the court decision itself, I’m no legal scholar but the way the case was presented left little room for them to decide otherwise. Our side got snookered, but that doesn’t give us the right to play games like an executive order that will most likely ruled unconstitutional. Lets do this the right way, get back the Statehouse and Terrace Hill and then work toward a legitamate solution.
But Timmy no one is talking about unlimited power, where do you get that from? You seem to suggest standing up to the court in ANY way other than an amendment is some sort of automatic unlimited power which is just flat out absurd.
The circumstances dictate when someone needs to stand up to a court that is not upholding the constitution. I don’t think anyone is suggesting that the Governor should have unlimited powers. The court was never intended to be a co-equal branch and the idea that the only recourse against unconstitutional court rulings is to change the constitution is just absurd. If they get out of line changing the constitution is not a sensible only alternative.
It is also a bit intellectually dishonest to suggest that what Bob Vander Plaats is seeking here is some sort of unlimited dictatorial power. That is a straw man and I don’t fight straw men.
Dean, I think “legislating” by executive order is a dangerous precident. Lets say for the sake of arguement BVP is Gov., issues his order and after litigation voila, Varnum is miraculoulsly overturned(no way it’s ever going to happen). What is to stop him from doing an end run on the legislature and ruling on other issues by decree(ex. order)? You don’t think that is going to be setting a precident? Here’s a thought for you, substitute Culver for any Republican and see what kind of orders he could issue. Or how about what if Gronstal became Governor, look at the power he has been able to wield as Sen. Majority leader can you imaging the abuse of power if he could rule by edict? BVP’s constant talk of this does nothing to actually further the cause but if he is elected and goes thru with this it will tie up resources and time that could be better spent on other issues and trust me, it isn’t going to play well with the majority of Iowans. What we need is a Governor AND Legislature who yes, is willing to work on the social agenda but has the good sense to make the more pressing issues of our financial mess, etc. the main focus of the campaign. You all can call me a fiscal conservative or whatever, but we need to make those issues that the majority of voters are demanding be dealt with our first priority, gay marriage ain’t it.
Timmy, have you ever actually listened to BVP, or read the executive order he asked Culver to sign? It doesn’t “miraculously overturn” the court. Since the court has to rely on the executive to enforce their opinions, this would be a case of an executive saying “time out!” It only stays the decision until the people have an opportunity to vote.
Your constant talk about how a governor can’t act like a governor does nothing to actually preserve our liberty or to convince anyone to support the GOP. What we need is a Governor and a Legislature that stops playing political games. We need statesmen who will do what’s right instead of politicians who want to get elected by trying to convince us that their brand of stupid is better than the Democrat’s.
I wouldn’t call you a fiscal conservative or a social conservative, and I don’t “trust you.” The first priority isn’t “gay marriage” it’s defending the Constitution! The most recent and obvious violation of the Constitution is the April 3rd “gay marriage” case, but the whole argument here is about principle. It’s about living under the Constitution instead of the whims of judges, politicians and the hacks that run them. It’s about making our laws consistent with what’s right and opposed to what’s wrong.
Any candidate for Governor needs to tell us how they will stand up to the court. They need to convince us that they have actually read the Constitution. It might also be nice if they had read the GOP platform too. Unless the candidates for governor can tell us how they are going to help us take the political power back from the courts and restore it to the people, they shouldn’t even be running.