Friday, July 01, 2005

The Dems Are Already Wrong on O'Connor's Replacement

Already the Dems are commenting on the certain battle to replace Sandra Day O'Connor. And they are already quite wrong. Courtesy of RealClearPolitics, here are a few excerpted Democrat comments:

Harry Reid: "Working with the Senate, the President should identify a highly qualified candidate whose views are within the broad constitutional mainstream and who will make all Americans proud. With this nomination the President should choose to unite the country, not divide it. I look forward to working with the President and my colleagues in the Senate to fill this critical vacancy."

Barbara Boxer, a/k/a Senator Mensa:"I urge the President and the Senate to ensure that her replacement reflects Justice O'Connor's judicial philosophy: mainstream, prochoice, and independent."

Pat Leahy:"I hope that the President will honor not only Justice O'Connor's record of service, but also her judicial independence, by respecting that tradition of meaningful consultation and in finding a nominee who will unite and not further divide the Nation."

Ted Kennedy: "Justice O'Connor was a mainstream conservative and was confirmed unanimously by the Senate. I hope the President will select someone who meets the high standards that she set, and that can bring the nation together as she did."

These are all worth the read for humor value, especially Kennedy's, but I'd like to focus on Sen. Mensa's remarks for a second. They are the only ones I have reproduced in their entirety. They are brief, probably because the crayon ran out, but I digress. Interestingly, Boxer describes O'Connor as "pro-choice" and "independent". Whacko leftists like Boxer demand compliance on abortion. That seems to undercut the whole notion of "independence". Of course, I loved the parts about the unity she fostered. Sandy O'Connor never brought the nation together or inspired unity. It wasn't her job, and most Americans never knew anything about her beyond the fact that she was on the Supreme Court.

Getting the picture? I'd propose this statement for them all: "President Bush needs to choose a nominee who will uphold abortion rights, and be politically reliable from a liberal perspective, because abortion--the ability to end an inconvenient pregnancy--is the greatest of our fundamental rights. If the President fails to select a candidate with whom we politically agree, we will filibuster such nominee until the cows come home and fill the air with incendiary rhetoric about rights being rolled back, racism, sexism, and any other tired label we can think of. Because the president will be responsible, by choosing a nominee we don't like, for unleashing our truly outrageous behavior which will cause division within the nation, and we will certainly blame him for the fruits of our irresponsible actions."

Now that I can believe.


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home