/* ------------------- 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 ------------------- */

Friday, July 08, 2005

Playing nice to start

--posted by Tony Garcia on 7/08/2005

The Las Vegas SUN reports Sen Harry Reid (D-NV) is being somewhat congenial and realistic in his approach to the Supreme Court nominees.
But the Senate Democratic leader said the nature of the confirmation proceedings ultimately will depend on whether Bush taps a "mainstream conservative" or someone further to the right of the political spectrum to fill the high court vacancy.

We'll get to that 'mainstream conservative' part in a second.
"The president, we know, will pick a conservative lawyer," Reid said. "We need a mainstream conservative. We're not going to get somebody that's our choice. It's his choice, and I look forward to working with him.

I want to be on the record saying that Reid will be among the ones who say that the Senate get to have say as to who is nominated. It is not true. They get to ONLY have a say on the professional qualifications of the person, not tell the President who to pick. Reid is playing nice now so that when he and Schumer turn into Chuckie (Schumer already is, I know) it will be easier for the MSM to report that the rancor is the President's fault.
Reid has recommended the president look outside the judicial branch, suggesting Republican Sens. Mel Martinez of Florida, Mike DeWine of Ohio, Mike Crapo of Idaho and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina for the nation's highest court.

Sorry, Senators are too slimey to be nominated. You can not trust them any further than you can spit upwind. None of them are acceptable. Congressmen, maybe. Senators: not at all.

Why not go back to the days of citizen appointments. Get an accomplished think tanker, or talk show host (NOT Rush, please), or businessman, or an author or professor. As Justice Black used to say, the law and those who decide upon it should make sense to the common person. Lawyers and judges do not have that skill: speaking to the layperson. I should be able to read a Court decision and not have to re-read it, re-read it and re-read it just to MAYBE think I get the gist. I should be able to read it like a good Wall Street Journal article.

Reid himself has been targeted in a critical advertising campaign by Fidelis, a conservative Catholic-based organization, over the upcoming nomination.

"As minority leader, Sen. Reid is in a unique position to ensure the confirmation hearings must follow nothing less than the threefold high standard of being responsible, civil and constitutional," the group said in a newspaper advertisement.

"Catholics and all people of faith must join together and defend Supreme Court nominees who will likely be attacked because of the faith and deeply held beliefs."

They nailed that on the head. ANY faith that is held by a nominee will be grounds for attack by the Democrat Senators. Religious leaders need to make their congregations aware of the attack by the Courts upon religion. This country should endorse freedom OF religion, not freedom FROM religion. They need to rally around a nominee with faith...and attack those who use a nominee's religion to disqualify the nominee.

Now, back to that "mainstream conservative" crap.

They say that the devil is in the details. "Mainstream conservative". What is that? If you talk to the average leftie they will tell you that conservativism is out of the mainstream. So what will qualify as "mainstream conservative"? I personally think that while Justice Scalia's philosophies are hard-conservative (like me) and may not be the mainstream, his reliance on strictly interpreting the law and precedent (as oppossed to adding laws from the bench) is a far more respectable trait. We need more of him (right or left leaning) on the Court. But since he may not be "mainstream" he would not get the nod again depriving the Court of a much needed judicial philosophy.

Also, would Rehnquist be considered mainstream? How about Thomas? Both of them are fairly in line with Bush. Bush, believe it or not, is more mainstream than the MSM give him credit for. You can't win a majority of an election if you are not mainstream. Would Reid admit that Rehnquist is mainstream? I doubt it. I guarantee that to Reid and his followers a "mainstream conservative" is actually more of an O'Connor-type of moderate...a finger in the wind type of moderate. An Arne Carlson or Norm Coleman or Olympia Snowe type of "conservative."

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home