Foiled - again!

[Ridgerunner]

I’m no expert in constitutional law or what, exactly, all of the schools of jurisprudence are properly called. I think perhaps “originalist” is applied to construction of the constitution, while “textualist” is used in connection with legislation.

Certain things do not change with time. “Thou shalt not kill” is how old? at least four thousand years, right? Probably much more. After all, Cain was condemned for killing Able. What can change with time is the respect people have for such things. When it comes to the unborn, it’s “construed away” by a court in 1973. But fewer and fewer people think it’s not “killing”, and probably someday it will be prohibited again (though doubtfully because of Barrett)

We all think we’re smarter than people who went before us because, e.g., we know how to start a car or transmit on a computer. But we’re not, and certainly not when it comes to basic human principles. Much of the constitution is just that.

 

[Sirach2]

You will never believe this! FOILED AGAIN!
Five minutes ago the senate voted on yet another motion by Sen. Schumar to table the motion to adjourn the senate until November 9 - UNLESS the Whitehouse and Speaker Pelosi reach a corona virus response deal. (Bribery?) The ayes had it 53/41 and the motion was tabled - AGAIN. He is one sick puppy, obsessed with getting an adjournment. The President Judge ruled that the previous motion (from yesterday) still stands.

Since this is the third attempt by him, you would think the senators are sick of his shenanigans, since it takes almost a half hour each time they are required to vote. A useless waste of time!

 

[Suudy]

Since this is the third attempt by him, you would think the senators are sick of his shenanigans, since it takes almost a half hour each time they are required to vote. A useless waste of time!

This was predicted by some. I posted a link a few weeks ago. The only tricks the Democrats have in their bag are stalling attempts. There are likely to be a lot more of these procedural tricks to stall the final vote.

 

[Sirach2]

Sickening, isn’t it? Thanks, Suudy. I can just imagine what tomorrow will bring, since they have fanatical determination to win their cause.

 

[Sirach2]

Election Prayer - Fr. John Hardon, SJ

I mentioned that EWTN uses this prayer as they recite the rosary after daily mass until November 3rd. For those who wish to pray it on their own, I reprint it for your devotion.

Lord Jesus Christ, You told us to give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar, and to God what belongs to God. Enlighten the minds of our people in America. May we choose a President of the United States and other government officials, according to your Divine Will. Give our citizens the courage to choose leaders of our nation who respect the sanctity of unborn human life, the sanctity of marriage, the sanctity of marital relations, the sanctity of the family, and the sanctity of the aging. Grant us the wisdom to give You what belongs to You, our God. If we do this, as a nation, we are confident You will give us an abundance of Your blessings through our elected leaders. Amen.

Prior to the rosary, the friars entrust the integrity of the electoral process in the hands of the Blessed Trinity, through the intercession of the Immaculate Conception, the patroness of the United States.

 

[JonNC]

Can any justice be the latter in today’s society with modern inventions such as the computer?

Scalia answers your question in the Heller Decision.

Some have made the argument, bordering on the frivo lous, that only those arms in existence in the 18th century are protected by the Second Amendment. We do not interpret constitutional rights that way. Just as the First Amendment protects modern forms of communications, e.g., Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union, 521 U. S. 844, 849 (1997), and the Fourth Amendment applies to modern forms of search, e.g., Kyllo v. United States, 533 U. S. 27, 35–36 (2001), the Second Amendment extends, prima facie, to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding.

It is the right that must be protected, be it the press, arms, the Fourth amendment, etc.

 

[Sirach2]

WASHINGTON – Senate Democrats say they will boycott a committee hearing Thursday where Amy Coney Barrett’s Supreme Court nomination is set to move forward, a longshot attempt that is unlikely to stall the federal judge’s confirmation to the high court.

Unbelievable! - BUT, foiled AGAIN. This will certainly jeopardize election results for Democrats who hoped to gain a senate seat. It may even pave a more certain road to Trump’s re-election.

Psalm 57: “They laid a snare for my steps; my soul was bowed down.
They dug a pit in my path, but fell in it themselves”.
(A prophetic word from today’s Divine Office - morning prayer)

AMEN!

 

[Sirach2]

Many may already know, if you watched the noon news, that the Judiciary Committee passed Amy Barrett’s nomination. It will go to the Senate floor, with the expected final vote on Monday. Thanks be to God.

 

[Sirach2]

There was yet another foiled attempt in the Senate by Mr. Schumer, just a few minutes ago. “A motion to postpone indefinitely the nomination of Judge Barrett.” Of course, it failed!

Moments later, he just made another motion to “recommit the Barrett nomination back to Judiciary.” It is difficult for me not to loathe him.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

The vote is still in process as I write this, but I expect it will be killed, as were all the others. The Judiciary already voted unanimously yesterday when the Dems boycotted their vote, and now Dems want them to take another vote.

Schumer’s motion was killed, as we expected.

 

[PaulinVA]

Moments later, he just made another motion to “recommit the Barrett nomination back to Judiciary.” It is difficult for me not to loathe him.

Why are you want to loathe a politician who is using procedural tactics to prevent other politicians from doing something out of the norm?

It’s both sides playing politics. Your loathing for one side and not the other is not well placed.

 

[qui_est_ce]

‘hijacking the Christian faith for votes’

Biden is the one who is hijacking the Catholic faith for votes. NPR swoons over the fact that he carries a Rosary in his picket and goes to mass regularly. And yet his actions are not in line with the Church. I get some of that, but the fact that he gratuitously marries two gay men, or promises to penalize the Little Sisters of the Poor underscores his true departure from being a “devout Catholic.” He didn’t need to do that to get the vote - or did he?

 

[Sirach2]

. . . but the fact that he gratuitously marries two gay men, or promises to penalize the Little Sisters of the Poor underscores his true departure from being a “devout Catholic.”

He also plans to repeal the Hyde Amendment.

 

[Sirach2]

Why are you want to loathe a politician who is using procedural tactics to prevent other politicians from doing something out of the norm?

It’s both sides playing politics. Your loathing for one side and not the other is not well placed.

He has used these tactics six times, losing each motion by a full republican vote. His arguments are always an echo chamber of his previous motion(s). I watched all of the hearings and I assure you the senate is doing nothing out of the norm. My butt is sore from sitting so long. Schumer’s only argument is that we need to wait until after the election, so that if Biden wins, HE can name one of their OWN nominees instead of ACB. When you digest four days of hearings from all the senators as I did, you might have a leg to argue.

A classic example from the Dems (especially from Kamala Harris, who got it all wrong) was to point out that Abe Lincoln delayed his nomination to replace Taney because the Senate was in recess in July 1864 and was not scheduled to reconvene until Dec. 5.

Think about it! There were no jet planes to fly them into session quickly, and therefore, he had no need to put a nominee forth until the senate met again in December. I give Ted Cruz loud kudos for his historical expertise with issues like this. I’m so glad I listened to these speeches!

Cruz pointed out the basic, numeric record of the number of times a Supreme Court vacancy came up during an election year: 29.
“The precedent is unequivocal and uniform: when a vacancy occurs in a presidential election year, the president makes a nomination, that includes Democrats, it includes Republicans,” Cruz said. “Of those 29, 19 of those occurred when the president and the Senate were of the same party. Of those 19, the Senate confirmed 17 of them.” But when the office of the president and the Senate were controlled by different parties, he noted, the odds were much worse. The Senate has confirmed the nominee only twice."

 

[Swordsman]

A sitting president who failed to make a court appointment following the death of a justice, so that the choice could become that of the opposition party, would be failing to perform the job for which he was elected.

“Fast tracking?” That’s spin.

Peace.

 

[Sirach2]

Once again, if anyone watched the Senate hearing yesterday, the Left had filibustered constantly, as they put forth bill after bill (a dozen at a minimum), and asked for unanimous consent to go into legislative session to debate them. It took only one objection from the floor to shut down each attempt.

The Senator constantly reminded them that their main purpose in convening on Saturday was for Amy Barrett’s nomination and therefore he objected, effectively shutting down each motion. One bill was from last July, but suddenly it became utterly important to the Left to discuss it now, several months later. I’m am confident the reader here will discern their agenda in these stall tactics. So very sad!

 

[Zake]

I am not a prophet, or a seer, but this does not bode well for the so-called republicans.

The majority of the Americans either actively support Roe, or indifferent about it. If the Senate’s main concern is not the mitigation of the effects of the virus (relief package anyone?), rather further eroding the women’s right to have dominion over their reproductive freedom, they will very likely vote against Trump and the republicans in the senate. To win a skirmish and lose the war is not the smart way to conduct a confrontation.

Only nine more days to go!

 

[Sirach2]

Last night, Gov. Mike Huckabee had an interesting view of both candidates - here.
Scroll to 3 minutes. It isn’t very long, and ends at 7.5 minutes.