/* ------------------- begin IP Block script ------------------- Block IP address script Points to php script on blog.racetotheright.com IP addresses are within the script ---------- */ /* -------------------- end IP Block script ------------------- */

Wednesday, May 18, 2005

Memos reveal strategy behind judge filibusters

--posted by Tony Garcia on 5/18/2005

(H/T to Glenn Beck and American Princess)

Why do I let these kinds of stories surprise me? I keep hoping for some glimmer that there is some decency in the Senate Democrats, that the opposition is at least honorable if not constantly wrong. I keep being proven wrong.

The Washington Times story reports that the Democrats have had closed door sessions with "outside groups". I don't care about that. But this filibustering of Bush's Judicial nominees is not based on the nominees qualifications as a judge. It is not because of some higher principles to Senate tradition.

Nope, the filibusters have been a long-standing plan base 100% on ideology...the last reason to kill judicial nominations.

The "nuclear" showdown that is expected to begin unfolding in the Senate today has its origins in closed-door discussions more than three years ago between key Senate Democrats and outside interest groups as they huddled to plot strategies for blocking President Bush's judicial nominees.

In a Nov. 7, 2001, internal memo to Sen. Richard J. Durbin, who is now the minority whip, an aide described a meeting that the Illinois Democrat had missed between groups opposed to Mr. Bush's nominees and Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, Massachusetts Democrat and member of the Judiciary Committee.

"Based on input from the groups, I would place the appellate nominees in the categories below," the staffer wrote, listing 19 nominees as "good," "bad" or "ugly."

Four of the 10 nominees who Democrats have since filibustered were deemed either "bad" or "ugly." None of those deemed "good" by the outside groups was filibustered.

So, the Democrats are ranking them based not on the qualifications as determined in the Committee hearings, but on input from special interest groups.

MN Lefty Liberal...are you upset about these games? Or is it just when the Republicans play political games?

Sorry, back on topic.

The strategery continues...still not based on judicial qualifications.

In a June 4, 2002, memo to Mr. Kennedy, staffers advised him that Justice Owen would be "our next big fight."

"We agree that she is the right choice -- she has a bad record on labor, personal injury and choice issues, and a broad range of national and local Texas groups are ready to oppose her," the aides wrote.

Another nominee discussed often in the memos is Miguel Estrada, a Washington lawyer who became the first filibustered nominee and who withdrew his nomination to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit after waiting two years for a final vote.

In the 2001 memo to Mr. Durbin, the staffer explained the concerns that the outside groups had about Mr. Estrada.

"They also identified Miguel Estrada (D.C. Circuit) as especially dangerous because he had a minimal paper trail, he is Latino, and the White House seems to be grooming him for a Supreme Court appointment," the aide wrote.

Whoa...did you catch that? The Senate Democrats were trying to keep a minority down. Now, as a Latino I take that memo as a compliment. They are saying that Latinos cannot be given a fair shake because we are especially dangerous as judges.

Maybe I'm wrong in that assessment. The only other way to read that is this way: Senate Democrats are racist. They are blocking a Latino and a Black from being judges.

Next question: Where the hell are the minority rights groups?

The filibuster has shown a couple of things (and these memos help bolster my point).

(1) The Democrats cannot get over the fact that they lost...the are the minority party and simply are sore losers. Sorry, just like the Philadelphia Eagles in this year's Super Bowl you have to suck it up and get ready for next year. The Eagles have no right calling themselves or acting like the Super Bowl Champs. The Democrats have no right expecting that their viewpoints should be treated like majority views, no standing expecting that their ideas become laws. We had to wait 40 years for our ideas to become laws...now you must wipe the tears from your eyes and wait til you are the majority again.
(2) The Senate Democrats are racist. They have been attacking Scalia (Italian), Thomas (Black), Estrada (Latino) and Owens (Black) for years. They hold as their champions Ginsburg (White), Souter (White), Stevens (White) and Breyer (White).
(3) Minority Rights Groups are hypocrites. They should be putting intense public pressure on the Senate Democrats for unfoundedly blocking Estrada and Owens. They are, sadly, silent on this issue. They were front and center to bash Bork (based on race-rights supposedly) and they were against Rehnquist's promotion (based on Minority Rights supposedly) but are AWOL now. The reason is that they are partisan hacks not crusaders against Minority oppression. The reason is that their leaders are hypocritical thugs whose allegiances are to money and Democrats (in that order) and racial equal opportunity is not on their priority list anymore.
(4) The media cannot be trusted for objective reporting. Still, I have to laugh at my debate coach, Eric Fuchs, who as recently as 2003 claimed that the New York Times specifically and the media in general were unbiased, fair, complete and objective. Poor kid, the wool was pulled over his eyes thanks to the brainwashing that occurs at schools across the country. But this filibuster ordeal is one more piece of evidence of the MSM's inability to report a story.


Post a Comment

<< Home