Minority Rule? How the Democrats decide who to filibuster

  • Thread starter Thread starter David_Paul
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
D

David_Paul

Guest
The Weekly Standard
by Steven G. Calabresi
05/09/2005

(snip) . . .The eminently qualified conservatives Democrats have quashed include Miguel Estrada, who is Hispanic, Janice Rogers Brown, who is African American, Bill Pryor, a brilliant young Catholic, and two white women, Priscilla Owen and Carolyn Kuhl. By keeping these five nominees off the federal courts of appeals, Democrats seem to have blocked Bush from considering them for the Supreme Court.

When George W. Bush became president in 2001, the legal left and the Democratic party rallied around the slogan “No more Clarence Thomases.” By that they meant that they would not allow any more conservative African Americans, Hispanics, women, or Catholics to be groomed for nomination to the High Court with court of appeals appointments. The Democrats have done such a good job of this that, today, the only names being floated as serious Supreme Court nominees are those of white men . . .(snip)

. . . Leading Democratic activists like Bruce Ackerman have called on Senate Democrats never to allow another Antonin Scalia or Clarence Thomas on the Supreme Court . . .(snip)

Why are Senate Democrats so afraid of conservative judicial nominees who are African Americans, Hispanics, Catholics, and women? Because these Clarence Thomas nominees threaten to split the Democratic base by aligning conservative Republicans with conservative voices in the minority community and appealing to suburban women . . .

Read More Here
 
it’s not just democrats. filib(l)uster is what politicians do best.
enough hot air to keep the world afloat if there were another inundation.
 
The Clinton “Everybody does it” excuse isn’t valid in this case. These filibusters of appeals court nominees are unprecedented in American history.

What is also unprecedented is being a traditional Christian is the litmus test. Astounding we have come to this point in America.

Judge Pickering, who bore the attacks for years, flat out said that Norman Lear’s “People for the American Way”, the group working point with Charles Schumer to block these nominations, is funded by the porno industry and Hollywood .

Not that everyone didn’t know that, just unusual that the situation is so bad and the purveyors of social degradation have so much power it needs to be pointed out.

A good article by David Harsanyi in the Denver Post this morning:

Rhetoric not as radical as you think

Harsanyi opposes James Dobson and Focus on the Family on social issues. He is an agnostic. He is conflicted on abortion. He is for gay marriage but says:

“I’m in the distinct minority. Every statewide initiative against gay marriage passes — overwhelmingly. Too bad. I’ll have to try to convince more of you.”

Harsanyi deplores the " hateful and irrational rhetoric" leaders on the left (of which he is apparently a member) is using against people of faith.

Harsanyi reminds me of the Democrats of good faith I remember as a kid–what the party of my parents was like before George Soros, Ralph Neas, Peter Lewis, Fred Eychaner, Steve Bing, Barry Lynn and the ACLU took it over.
 
The radical left has taken control of the Democrat party and forced out most moderates and conservatives, making the Democrats a minority party in the process.

They cannot win at the ballot box, so to preserve and expand their power, all they have left is the judiciary. They will fight to the very last to keep judges off the bench who might look at Roe v Wase with a critical eye.

The Democrats are all about abortion. They have nothing left. Oh, I’m sure the pornographers who make political donations don’t donate to the GOP, too, but the Dems are all about license.

Everyone should check out the post and link about Democrat Colorado Sen. Ken Salazar, a strident abortionist.
 
40.png
David_Paul:
The Weekly Standard
by Steven G. Calabresi
05/09/2005

Why are Senate Democrats so afraid of conservative judicial nominees who are African Americans, Hispanics, Catholics, and women? Because these Clarence Thomas nominees threaten to split the Democratic base by aligning conservative Republicans with conservative voices in the minority community and appealing to suburban women . . .

Read More Here
Click to expand...
They are afraid of ANY hispanic, African American, or person of faith who is NOT a liberal Democrat because they cannot control such individuals. They want the “sheeple” who believe the rhetoric that liberalism has helped hispanics, African Americans, etc. Sadly some do but the examples of Clarence Thomas and Dr Rice indicate that they can’t fool all of the people all of the time
Lisa N
 
What I think is sad is that many Catholics support politicians who are anti-Catholic.

Did any of you vote for Charles Schumer (D-NY)?

committeeforjustice.org/contents/news/news081103_novak.shtml

The libs know that they cannot gain control of the legislative branch or the executive branch, so they will use the judicial branch to impose their minority viewpoints on the majority by fiat.
 
40.png
David_Paul:
What is also unprecedented is being a traditional Christian is the litmus test. Astounding we have come to this point in America.
Click to expand...
It’s a real shame that a litmus test wasn’t applied earlier. Some of the bad judges could have been kept off the bench rather than just approving them with a wink and nod of human respect to the President’s will.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top