June 10, 2005

Conservatives Prove Ideology Should Not Be a Factor for Judges

We’ve seen the deplorable antics out of the "party of impediments" to the democratic processes of our government witnessed by the so-called filibusters of unacceptable judicial nominees. Only a late breaking deal struck by spaghetti-spined republicrats and like anatomied democrats canceled out what should have been the dissolution of the filibuster against judicial nominees once and for all. Instead a deal was struck, not a compromise mind you, but a deal. A compromise benefits both parties involved in the compromise. This “deal” benefited the party of liberals with the guarantee of future showdowns over judicial nominees. And don’t you know it’s coming.

If you think you have seen acrimony over federal court candidates wait until the President of the United States exercises his constitutional right to appoint his own candidates to the Supreme Court. So in preparation of that fiasco and the despicable rhetoric that the party of liberals will be using commit what I am about to say to memory.

They have said that only those nominees who are outside the “mainstream” of American thought and values will be opposed. Understand that “mainstream” is defined by them unilaterally. Also understand that the congressional oversight is supposed to be concerning a nominee’s suitability for a judgeship based on his or her legal education, experience, and ability; NOT on their personal ideology. And when they start blathering about Republican obstructionism of past democratic appointees, here this well.

Ruth Bader Ginsberg, Bill Clinton’s most liberal and left judge ever known to occupy the Supreme Court, believed in a constitutional right to prostitution and polygamy, attacked the Boy Scouts of America and the Girl Scouts of America as organizations that perpetuate stereotyped sex roles, wanted to abolish mother’s and father’s day for the same reason, and wanted to end single sex prisons so that men could learn to live respectfully with women. In the history of the court, if there was ever a valid reason to deny a judgeship on the basis of ideology, she was it. And yet her appointment was approved 96-3 because the Republicans realized it was part of the President’s spoils of war to be able to appoint his own justices ideology not withstanding.

So when the battle heats up as it surely will, remember this and throw it in their faces over and again. Maybe someone will hear.


Post a Comment

<< Home