I just finished reading Men in Black: How the Supreme Court is Destroying America By Mark R. Levin. I don't agree with everything he wrote especially his two basic solutions to controlling the Court--basically because they both require Constitutional Amendments. I think there are sufficient methods already available in the Constitution if we have the will to use them. However, I do recommend the book. It is informative reading especially if you are not familiar with the court system and how it has operated over the years.
That said, over the last two days, the Peoria Journal Star has had a couple of articles dealing with Judge Roberts' nomination and I want to discuss some of the things said (as quoted in the paper) by some of the Democrats. The first article entitled "Roberts picks up Democratic support" was on page A2 of the 9/22/05 Journal Star. Democratic Senator Patrick Leahy who is the top Democrat on the Judiciary Committee is quoted as saying, "'I can only take him at his word that he does not have an ideological agenda.'" That is an almost obscene comment considering that it is the libertine Democrats who have the ideological agenda and it is the libertine Democrats who have been using the Supreme Court to achieve what they could not achieve through the legislative process. Do they really believe the majority of the American people are so ignorant that they don't know this?
Another comment from the same headlined article is from Illinois Senator Barack Obama. He is quoted as stating, "'He strikes me as a good and decent person, but he is still following instructions, which is to say as little as possible on some core issues about how he would decide cases.'" Duh! The Senate's responsibility is to select a nominee who is qualified to serve on the Supreme Court. It is not suppose to be issue based; but qualification based. First of all, until a case is before the Supreme Court, no Justice knows what the issues are. Furthermore, the Supreme Court is not supposed to be issue based; it is suppose to be constitutionally based. These libertine Senators are so far in left field both literally and figuratively that they no longer even recognize the function of the Supreme Court. It is not a super legislature!
There were two articles next to each other on page A2 of the 9/23/05 Peoria Journal Star. "Roberts wins committee approval" has this quote from Libertine Democratic Senator Edward Kennedy, "'The values and perspectives displayed over and over again in his record cast doubt on his view of voting rights, women's rights, civil rights and disability rights.'" What Senator Kennedy means is that Judge Roberts' values are not the same as Senator Kennedy's values (or lack of values). What he further means is that he doesn't think Judge Roberts supports the murder of unborn babies (a bogus, espoused women's "right") nor does he think the Judge supports homosexuality as a civil right. Libertine Democrats prefer to use code phrases rather than actually defining their lack of moral values.
The final article on the same page is headlined "Durbin, Obama announce their opposition." Senators Durbin and Obama are Illinois' two Democratic Senators. Senator Durbin is quoted as saying, "'He was so cautious and so guarded and so unwilling to tell us the most basic things about his beliefs and values. This man is going to guide our court for generations. (I'm not sure how long he expects Judge Roberts to live?) I just needed to know more before I gave him my vote.'" Libertine Democrat speak for "He didn't say he was going to support the murder of unborn babies or homosexuality as a civil right so I'm not about to upset my libertine Democratic money bagmen by voting for him." (My translation, of course.)
In the same article, Illinois Senator Obama states, "'... I hope that he will recognize who the weak and who the strong are in our society, and I hope that his jurisprudence is one that stands up to bullies of all ideological stripes.'" What!!! That is not part of the job description or part of the function of a member of the court system. The function of the court is to apply the law and the Constitution as it was written. Senator Obama's comment may be relevant for a member of Congress. It is not appropriate for a member of the court. The court is not supposed to take sides on an issue. (They have been for years but they are not supposed to; that is not their purpose and function.) Again, Senator Obama is trying to turn judges and Justices into super legislators. We have far too much of that already!
What is glaringly absent from any of these quoted comments and any other printed comment I have read (or heard) from Democrats is the only area that they should be examining. Will Judge Roberts follow and uphold the Constitution of the United States? That is the purpose and function ultimately of all judges and Justices. Why do libertine Democrats not even consider that question?
That said, over the last two days, the Peoria Journal Star has had a couple of articles dealing with Judge Roberts' nomination and I want to discuss some of the things said (as quoted in the paper) by some of the Democrats. The first article entitled "Roberts picks up Democratic support" was on page A2 of the 9/22/05 Journal Star. Democratic Senator Patrick Leahy who is the top Democrat on the Judiciary Committee is quoted as saying, "'I can only take him at his word that he does not have an ideological agenda.'" That is an almost obscene comment considering that it is the libertine Democrats who have the ideological agenda and it is the libertine Democrats who have been using the Supreme Court to achieve what they could not achieve through the legislative process. Do they really believe the majority of the American people are so ignorant that they don't know this?
Another comment from the same headlined article is from Illinois Senator Barack Obama. He is quoted as stating, "'He strikes me as a good and decent person, but he is still following instructions, which is to say as little as possible on some core issues about how he would decide cases.'" Duh! The Senate's responsibility is to select a nominee who is qualified to serve on the Supreme Court. It is not suppose to be issue based; but qualification based. First of all, until a case is before the Supreme Court, no Justice knows what the issues are. Furthermore, the Supreme Court is not supposed to be issue based; it is suppose to be constitutionally based. These libertine Senators are so far in left field both literally and figuratively that they no longer even recognize the function of the Supreme Court. It is not a super legislature!
There were two articles next to each other on page A2 of the 9/23/05 Peoria Journal Star. "Roberts wins committee approval" has this quote from Libertine Democratic Senator Edward Kennedy, "'The values and perspectives displayed over and over again in his record cast doubt on his view of voting rights, women's rights, civil rights and disability rights.'" What Senator Kennedy means is that Judge Roberts' values are not the same as Senator Kennedy's values (or lack of values). What he further means is that he doesn't think Judge Roberts supports the murder of unborn babies (a bogus, espoused women's "right") nor does he think the Judge supports homosexuality as a civil right. Libertine Democrats prefer to use code phrases rather than actually defining their lack of moral values.
The final article on the same page is headlined "Durbin, Obama announce their opposition." Senators Durbin and Obama are Illinois' two Democratic Senators. Senator Durbin is quoted as saying, "'He was so cautious and so guarded and so unwilling to tell us the most basic things about his beliefs and values. This man is going to guide our court for generations. (I'm not sure how long he expects Judge Roberts to live?) I just needed to know more before I gave him my vote.'" Libertine Democrat speak for "He didn't say he was going to support the murder of unborn babies or homosexuality as a civil right so I'm not about to upset my libertine Democratic money bagmen by voting for him." (My translation, of course.)
In the same article, Illinois Senator Obama states, "'... I hope that he will recognize who the weak and who the strong are in our society, and I hope that his jurisprudence is one that stands up to bullies of all ideological stripes.'" What!!! That is not part of the job description or part of the function of a member of the court system. The function of the court is to apply the law and the Constitution as it was written. Senator Obama's comment may be relevant for a member of Congress. It is not appropriate for a member of the court. The court is not supposed to take sides on an issue. (They have been for years but they are not supposed to; that is not their purpose and function.) Again, Senator Obama is trying to turn judges and Justices into super legislators. We have far too much of that already!
What is glaringly absent from any of these quoted comments and any other printed comment I have read (or heard) from Democrats is the only area that they should be examining. Will Judge Roberts follow and uphold the Constitution of the United States? That is the purpose and function ultimately of all judges and Justices. Why do libertine Democrats not even consider that question?
posted by Christian Gunslinger at 12:35 AM
1 Comments:
Hey, I find your ideas idiotic and offensive (but defend your right to blog away ;), but I despise spammers even more--go to your template and enter the settings and turn on the "word verification"... this will put an end to the spammers hitting your comment sections.
Post a Comment
<< Home