DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post - Lesons from the Roberts and Alito hearings

**nobodyhere** · 01-13-2006, 07:47 PM

In the last year, we have seen the leftist extremists in the Senate try to pin "racism" or "bigotry" on two judges who simply didn't have them. And the Democrats weren't trying to find out WHETHER those candidates were racists or not. They were trying to convince everyone that they WERE racists and bigots, even if they weren't. The truth about John Roberts or Samuel Alito didn't matter to them - only the opportunity to smear law-abiding judges mattered.

And their hearings were relatively benign, as hearings of originalist nominees go. Compare them to the treatment Democrats gave two other eminently-qualified originalists, Clarence Thomas and Robert Bork. Paying no attention to the superior qualities of either man, the Democrats did everything they could to personally destroy them. They were uninterested in putting a man on the Court who could wisely and correctly judge Constitutional issues, as both candidates plainly could. Rather they could see nothing beyond the candidate's likelihood of overturning various wrongly-decided cases that happen to support the liberal agenda, such as Kelo, Roe v. Wade, US v. Miller and others. They are desperate to keep judges on the bench who will allow those warped decisions to stand, regardless of the harm done to Constitutional jurisprudence in the process.

These Democrats are no friend of the U.S. Constitution. Rather than supporting it as every Federal officeholder should (and many are sworn to do), their intent is to get around it, and put their own liberal Nanny-state agenda in place despite the Constitution's clear bans on many parts of it.

In the last several months, we have seen two strong Constitutional judges weather the storm of the Democrats' destruction derby. When the leftists are faced with the loss of even more of their dwindling cadre of anti-constitutional supporters from the bench, how will they react when their pro-constitutionalist replacements are in the hot seat?

As Democrat desperation mounts, how far will they go, in their fanatical desire to preserve the unconstitutionl Nanny-state agenda they have managed to slip through the courts for the last 70+ years?

01-13-2006, 07:47 PM	#1
nobodyhere Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 519 Senior Member	Lesons from the Roberts and Alito hearings In the last year, we have seen the leftist extremists in the Senate try to pin "racism" or "bigotry" on two judges who simply didn't have them. And the Democrats weren't trying to find out WHETHER those candidates were racists or not. They were trying to convince everyone that they WERE racists and bigots, even if they weren't. The truth about John Roberts or Samuel Alito didn't matter to them - only the opportunity to smear law-abiding judges mattered. And their hearings were relatively benign, as hearings of originalist nominees go. Compare them to the treatment Democrats gave two other eminently-qualified originalists, Clarence Thomas and Robert Bork. Paying no attention to the superior qualities of either man, the Democrats did everything they could to personally destroy them. They were uninterested in putting a man on the Court who could wisely and correctly judge Constitutional issues, as both candidates plainly could. Rather they could see nothing beyond the candidate's likelihood of overturning various wrongly-decided cases that happen to support the liberal agenda, such as Kelo, Roe v. Wade, US v. Miller and others. They are desperate to keep judges on the bench who will allow those warped decisions to stand, regardless of the harm done to Constitutional jurisprudence in the process. These Democrats are no friend of the U.S. Constitution. Rather than supporting it as every Federal officeholder should (and many are sworn to do), their intent is to get around it, and put their own liberal Nanny-state agenda in place despite the Constitution's clear bans on many parts of it. In the last several months, we have seen two strong Constitutional judges weather the storm of the Democrats' destruction derby. When the leftists are faced with the loss of even more of their dwindling cadre of anti-constitutional supporters from the bench, how will they react when their pro-constitutionalist replacements are in the hot seat? As Democrat desperation mounts, how far will they go, in their fanatical desire to preserve the unconstitutionl Nanny-state agenda they have managed to slip through the courts for the last 70+ years?
	Quote