Overturn Roe v. Wade
Just get it over with. Show the country exactly who's running it. With last night's official nomination of Judge John G. Roberts the writing may be on the wall.
In 1990, Roberts, as Deputy Soliciter General helped write a brief for a Supreme Court case that stated, "We continue to believe that Roe was wrongly decided and should be overruled." During his 2003 confirmation hearing for the appeals court on the matter, Roberts said: "Roe v. Wade is the settled law of the land. ... There's nothing in my personal views that would prevent me from fully and faithfully applying that precedent." But it's a difference from being an umpire to actually writing the rules. As Circuit Court Judge Roberts he had to follow the higher court's precedents. As Justice Roberts he can make precedent including overturning Roe. I just saw Robert Novak, yes that Novak, say that Judge Roberts is a "devote Catholic" and his wife is "a pro-life activist." Any bets on where the Supreme Court is going?
W and his party are masters of bait and switch. Remember "I'm a uniter not a divider?" It's not a political promise it's high comedy. These guys will sneak up on you like political ninjas and before you know it you're finished. W went through the show of "consulting" with Democratic senators and then nominated who he wanted. And who he wanted was a solid conservative who won't drift left in the next 30-plus years we will likely be living under Roberts' decrees. James Dobson, Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, Ralph Reed, Tony Perkins,and Don Wildman , just to name a few, probably have Cheshire cat smiles on their faces right now. It's payback time for the religious right and they just cashed their first special dividend check. When Chief Justice William Rehnquist leaves the court, vertically or horizontally, it's going to be another kabuki dance of "consulting" the Democrats and then nominating a reliable conservative opposed to Roe and for prayer and the 10 Commandments in school and everywhere else.
And what if Roe v. Wade was overturned or made the exception to the rule? Then maybe people in this country would see the true nature of the Republicans who advocate smaller government except when it comes to personal privacy rights, women's rights, church and state issues, free speech, marriage, voting rights, etc, then they want to rule by their version of Shariah law. Look at the recent developments in Iraq on their drafting of a constitution. Another group of religious zealots on a mission from God, in the words of Jake and Elwood Blues, who want to rule like Gladys Kravitz from "Bewitched." The nosy neighbor wants to not only know what you're doing but wants to tell you if you can do it and the punishment for doing it. We are becoming the Supernanny state with W and his merry band of crusaders telling you how to live your life according to their reading of the Bible.
The bottom line is Democrats need to win elections to get control of judicial nominations. Maybe the only way to do that is to let the country see how bad its going to get with Republicans in charge. With Roberts and the next supreme court nominee we may see that sooner than you think and for a long time to come.
In 1990, Roberts, as Deputy Soliciter General helped write a brief for a Supreme Court case that stated, "We continue to believe that Roe was wrongly decided and should be overruled." During his 2003 confirmation hearing for the appeals court on the matter, Roberts said: "Roe v. Wade is the settled law of the land. ... There's nothing in my personal views that would prevent me from fully and faithfully applying that precedent." But it's a difference from being an umpire to actually writing the rules. As Circuit Court Judge Roberts he had to follow the higher court's precedents. As Justice Roberts he can make precedent including overturning Roe. I just saw Robert Novak, yes that Novak, say that Judge Roberts is a "devote Catholic" and his wife is "a pro-life activist." Any bets on where the Supreme Court is going?
W and his party are masters of bait and switch. Remember "I'm a uniter not a divider?" It's not a political promise it's high comedy. These guys will sneak up on you like political ninjas and before you know it you're finished. W went through the show of "consulting" with Democratic senators and then nominated who he wanted. And who he wanted was a solid conservative who won't drift left in the next 30-plus years we will likely be living under Roberts' decrees. James Dobson, Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, Ralph Reed, Tony Perkins,and Don Wildman , just to name a few, probably have Cheshire cat smiles on their faces right now. It's payback time for the religious right and they just cashed their first special dividend check. When Chief Justice William Rehnquist leaves the court, vertically or horizontally, it's going to be another kabuki dance of "consulting" the Democrats and then nominating a reliable conservative opposed to Roe and for prayer and the 10 Commandments in school and everywhere else.
And what if Roe v. Wade was overturned or made the exception to the rule? Then maybe people in this country would see the true nature of the Republicans who advocate smaller government except when it comes to personal privacy rights, women's rights, church and state issues, free speech, marriage, voting rights, etc, then they want to rule by their version of Shariah law. Look at the recent developments in Iraq on their drafting of a constitution. Another group of religious zealots on a mission from God, in the words of Jake and Elwood Blues, who want to rule like Gladys Kravitz from "Bewitched." The nosy neighbor wants to not only know what you're doing but wants to tell you if you can do it and the punishment for doing it. We are becoming the Supernanny state with W and his merry band of crusaders telling you how to live your life according to their reading of the Bible.
The bottom line is Democrats need to win elections to get control of judicial nominations. Maybe the only way to do that is to let the country see how bad its going to get with Republicans in charge. With Roberts and the next supreme court nominee we may see that sooner than you think and for a long time to come.
posted by Crankyboy at 10:23 AM
6 Comments:
Easy for an upper middle class male with a better than average income to say.
One thing that I've noticed in the blogosphere system of statements followed by open comments is that in written statements, the tone, sarcasm, and irony often get lost. I'm surprised that "Ellen Beth" doesn't realize that you two are on the same side of this issue.
Regarding your conclusion, it's a hard way to learn things (i.e. seeing first hand from damage done) and clearly not preferable, but I agree -- it's probably the only way we'll end up convincing a majority of Americans of what we're in for.
Crankyboy replies to Ellen and d.k.:
Yes, the point of the idea is that I'm not in favor of overturning Roe but if that's what it takes to wake people up to the loons running the Republican party so be it. And even if Roe were overturned in its entirety individual states would have the right and the authority to allow abortion. While that would be difficult for many people in the anti-choice states again it might wake them up to the mullahs who have taken over the Republican party.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
(sorry for the deletes, I notice some typos before)
d.k., ya didn't get it because you don't know that I know the curmudg. I like to raz him now and then... But I do stand by my statement because it's not curmudg that is going to feel the pain here and it's easy to talk about something when you don't get the consequences, like Bush talking about sacrifice for freedom when the dumb dumb twins will never have to accessorize a military uniform. It will take years and I fear what else to undo what is being done by the Bush admin, so we shouldn't be so quick to try to add to it. The Am people are hugely to blame for taking their democracy for granted.
Post a Comment
<< Home