Thursday, September 15, 2005

Democratic Doublespeak on Roberts [Updated: Scrolling Roberts Post] 

(Note: I decided to keep my daily take on the Roberts hearings in a single post, for easy reference. I will pop it to the top of the blog when its updated, so check the updates at the bottom of the post if you're interested.)

First off, tell me this isn't a bias headline:

Roberts Dodges Specifics on Abortion

Oooh, that fiesty John Roberts; just like him and his conservative wacko friends to lie, cheat, steal and dodge their way into a position of power. Nevermind that the same sort of vague responses and outright refusals are an established precedent in the initiation of Supreme Court judges, as the AP article later notes (perhaps in an attempt to balance their ridiculous headlines, I mean really, who writes these things?):
Roberts struck sparks when he indicated his refusal to answer certain questions was based in part on a precedent of "no hints, no forecasts, no previews" that Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg set at her hearings a dozen years ago.

Senator Biden rejected the idea, revealing his ignorance of the hearings and the precedent in question (big surprise), as evidenced when we examine Ginsburg's own words from her hearing, taken from Wikipedia:
"Were I to rehearse here what I would say and how I would reason on such questions, I would act injudiciously."

The wikipedia article notes that she did explain her understanding of the right to privacy, as Democrats such as Biden will remind you unceasingly, but so did Roberts:
"The right to privacy is protected under the Constitution in various ways," Roberts said at one point. Hours later, he said he agreed with a 38-year-old high court ruling in a case involving contraceptives for married couples, a decision often cited as the underpinning for abortion rights.

The only real indications we can draw from these hearings is that today's Democratic party, especially those on the fringe left, are exactly who they appear to be: out of touch with main stream America, cautiously anti-religion, and fatally enamored with a cult of unchecked sexual deviance and, consequentially, abortion. The AP story notes that the issue of Abortion was raised only seconds into the hearings, and continued to be the main topic of debate throughout the day. Is it any surprise? All too often, a giddy, left leaning MSM will run stories about the fragile makeup of today's conservative block, but perhaps they should examine a little closer to home. Without the buzz words and sloganeering of the ever-present abortion issue, the left would have no way of covering up how blatantly irrelevant it is to 21st century America. A conglomerate of aging hipsters, soho generation college students who don't want to pay for music, let alone pay the consequences of their relativistic moral postering and sexual promiscuity, University proffesors, and all manner of idealogues from across the spectrum, today's American left has nothing in common, save for its sadistic worship of self mutilation, and perhaps anti-Americanism, although even on the left there are some who recognize a war when they see one. Its no surprise the Democrats are so anxious to use the "a" word at the Roberts hearings. Everyone knows he is pro-life, and unless they try to scare up enough ad hoc support, Roberts will be confirmed. But the real punchline is that he will probably be confirmed anyway. Surprise! In addition to being an otherwise nice guy, with a sterling record and a brilliant career, the majority of Americans probably agree with Roberts. But that's not important to senators like Biden: Nevermind judicial philosophy, adherance to the constitution, or understanding the legal principles on which his confirmation, and the abortion issue, rest. And why? Because abortion is all he's got.

[Update:] 9/14

Man, I just keep having luck with these AP Headlines. I mean, imagine, a judge deciding cases based on the law! Well, I never heard such a thing! The Roberts hearings, on day two, took on a more subdued tone, as Democrats struggled to come to grips with their own irrelevance. At any rate, I am pleased by Roberts statements on the Kelo ruling and congress's ability to usurp it, and on his conservative, but not mindlessly antiquated, stance on the use of foreign law and precedent. As usual, Joe Biden is on the attack, which seems strange given Roberts' other statements. If he plans to make decisions based on legal precedent and statute, than his personal beliefs are irrelevant. In fact, the much vaunted right to provacy, on which the lefties base or justify almost everything, should entitle Roberts to be as conservative and religious and neighborly as he likes, as long as he will rule based on an understanding of the constitution. On a positive note, Senator Cornyn from texas said Roberts "may very well be the most qualified nominee ever appointed". At least some people recognize intellect and character. Or, in Biden's case, a lack of.

[Update:] 9/15

Well, Roberts has passed the guantlet of questioning, enquiring, and generally trying to smear his character based on trumped up civil rights charges and and conservative abortion stance. From the looks of it, he will easily be confirmed and we will be through (temporarily) of this constant deluge of past memos and personal convictions being aired as public gossip. I hope he does get the opportunity to overturn Roe v. Wade, or at least rule on it, and really justify his refusal to answer the continued quesitoning. Ted (hiccup) Kennedy tried his best to make Roberts uncomfortable by demanding he acquiesce to several specific points of Liberal orthodoxy on civil rights legislation, but none the less Roberts probably won't pass with the kind of mandate we saw in the last confirmation (96 to 3). Apparently, it's not enough to bend over backward for the most out of touch ideologues in the senate; one also needs to demonstrate ample ability to grovel in such a position.

Comments: Post a Comment

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?