« Dean's Song | Main | Terrorism on the border »
January 09, 2006
Complete Leftist argument against confirmation of Sam Alito to the SCOTUS
"He's not One.Of.Us!"
Posted by Darleen at January 9, 2006 07:32 AM
Comments
Well, not exactly, but before he's confirmed I'd like to know:
Does he believe that it is settle law that:
(1) women do have a constitutional right to an abortion,
(2) that Americans do have a constitutional right of privacy,
(3) that presidents do not have unlimited power, even in wartime.
(4) That Americans have a constitutional right to a one-man, one vote electoral system.
(5) That Americans need not put up with segregated schools and finally,
(6) that Congress does indeed have the right to regulate the interstate shipment of machine guns.
If he answers yes, then I'd like to know if he feels that the above judicial precedents should be re-visited or overruled entirely.
If he answer yes again, then I'd vote against confirmation.
If I were a senator.....
Posted by: Carl W. Goss at January 9, 2006 08:08 AM
I just love the double standard. Ruth Bader Ginzberg refuses to answer any such questions and is applauded. For Alito this is a perfectly okie-fine test. Ted Kennedy set the precedent with Thurgood Marshall. I think it is time the Dems learn to live with the rules THEY wanted.
Posted by: J Rob at January 9, 2006 08:11 PM
1)Women do not have a Constitutional Right to an abortion. Even Roe V Wade acknowledges that the State has the right to prevent an abortion.
2)There is no Constitutional Right to privacy. The word does not even appear in the Constitution.
3)Tell that to Lincoln and FDR. If Pres. Bush was doing half the things they did (including imprisoning thousands of people because of their race, or newspaper reporters for attacking the conduct of the war)the left might be forgiven their constant attacks on this president.
4)Show me an accusation of Republican voter fraud and I'll show you two Democratic ones. First one is free, Chicago 1960 Presidential Election. ( and an added bonus...any election Huey Long was involved in)
5)Don't look now, it is the minorities who are segregating themselves today. Anyone trying to imply that white racists are discriminating against minorities today in any organized fashion is deeply and sadly out of touch.
6) Actually given the history of the Second Amendment, and the knowledge that the Founding Fathers designed a government with no standing army, it is clear that the Founders intended private citizens to own military grade weapons.
Posted by: Gahrie at January 9, 2006 08:14 PM
- The Liberalcrats remind me of the 7 year old who has been stealing cookies from the kitchen for months and finally gets caught, frantically looking for any lamebrained excuse to keep the party going. During the 70's/80's they snuk activist judges into the SC under the noses of the electorate, and managed to get things their way through the Liberal biased courts they knew would never make it at the ballot box. Abortion and privacy are states rights issues and should never have even been adjudicated in the SC. Its not a federal issue. Thats why it doesn't appear in the Constitution. The framers intentionally put the wall of protection into it in the XI and X amendments, specifically intended to protect these areas to the perview of the states. This has been the elephant in the room since Roe was first passed, and every Judicial authority thats ever looked at it knows thats true.
- So as a direct result the Liberals, who do not believe in majority rule, and only in states rights when it suits their purpose, are hanging on by their finger nails, because the one thing they don't want is for these issues to go back to the states for an appropriate vote by the public, on a state by state basis. If its not clear to you why just take a moment and reflect on the same-sex marriage mess. Liberals do not trust the system of governance we live under. They want a socialism, where the gov. coddles us from crib to grave and majority rule is blasphemy. In otherwords a "hive" mentality, wherein you could kiss most of your liberties and civil/social rights goodbye. Just one more irony that their poly-sci profs somehow forget to mention when they hype the marvels of the Utopian Anarchy.
- But the good news. I'm watching the glum Deafeto-crats float their mis-characterizations of Alito, and prop up thier strawmen arguments desperately, as each and every one is debunked by the Reps.
- something like watching a video, where the Dimbulbs are like the tiny spec of a guy on a snowmobile looking up at a 50 foot wall of unrushing snowy avalaunch.
- Their position, as transperant as it could possible be is: "I want to be assured that Alito will vote to maintain the mis-interpetation of our Constitution, so the improper fiasco can go on.". They're so desperate, they've completely changed the nature of the comfirmation hearings, thrown out the idea of the "gold standard" they themselves demanded be adhered to, and decided it was wrong for a sitting President, for the first time in two hundred years, to appoint justices of his choosing, and therefore deserved to be fillibustered. What a bunch of losers.....
Posted by: Big Bang Hunter at January 10, 2006 10:30 PM