| Submit your comments on this article | |
| Home Front: Politix | |
| The Left weighs in on Judge Alito, EFL | |
| 2005-10-31 | |
| House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi "Last week after Harriet Miers withdrew her nomination, I asked the President: Who was in charge? Today, the President answered: the radical conservative right is in charge of his Administration. Instead of seeking to unify the country with a nominee who would command wide consensus, the President again chose to submit to the dictates of the radical right. The President's nomination of Judge Alito reflects weakness - the President is unable or unwilling to withstand pressure by an extreme element in our country, rather than acting as a leader of all the people. "The Supreme Court must not be used as a tool by extremists to fulfill an ideological agenda and to undermine our individual rights. Under our Constitution, the Senate has an independent role in deciding whether to confirm a nominee to the Supreme Court. That responsibility is especially compelling with this nominee, whose rulings on the right to privacy, including a woman's right to choose; civil rights; and basic labor protections are troubling and far removed from the mainstream. The Senate must have full, comprehensive hearings and carefully scrutinize Judge Alito's record." Howard Dean "A lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court of the United States is too important to be sacrificed on the altar of short-term political gain. President Bush's nomination of Alito is not leadership, it is capitulation. "Alito's record suggests an activist judicial philosophy bent on rolling back the rights and freedoms that all Americans value. Alito has sought to limit the rights of women and people with disabilities in discrimination cases, demonstrated an open hostility to women's privacy rights even in basic reproductive health matters, has a record of hostility toward immigrants, and tried to immunize employers from employment discrimination cases. It is particularly troubling that President Bush would nominate a judge who would reverse American progress and make the Supreme Court look less like America on the same day that most Americans are honoring the life and legacy of Rosa Parks." Brady Campaign In 1996, Judge Samuel Alito was the sole judge who dissented from his Third Circuit Court of Appeals colleagues when they upheld the authority of Congress to ban fully automatic machine guns. "Earth to Sammy -- who needs legal machine guns?" asked Jim Brady, chair of the Brady Campaign. "The Chicago mobsters of the 1930s would be giddy. But the man I worked for, who gave us Sandra Day O'Connor and signed the 1986 machine gun ban, would be shaking his head." "Judge Alito's ludicrous machine gun decision is bad enough. But it also indicates that a Justice Alito would attempt to prevent Congress from passing other laws to protect Americans from gun violence," said Michael D. Barnes, president of the Brady Campaign. "If Judge Alito had his way, the federal machine gun ban would have been struck down as unconstitutional, and the private possession of these weapons would have become legal." NARAL âInstead of unifying the country, President Bush has chosen the path of confrontation,â said Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America. âSandra Day OâConnor has been the Courtâs swing Justice, casting the deciding votes over the years to protect womenâs reproductive freedom. Alitoâs confirmation could shift the Court in a direction that threatens to eviscerate the core protections for womenâs freedom guaranteed by Roe v. Wade, or overturn the landmark decision altogether.â
| |
| Posted by:Steve |
| #10 "If Judge Alito had his way, the federal machine gun ban would have been struck down as unconstitutional, and the private possession of these weapons would have become legal." And since it expired how many bloodbaths have we had? None? Gee.... it is almost like that law was worthless or something. |
| Posted by: mmurray821 2005-10-31 17:38 |
| #9 Pelosi asking the president 'who was in charge?' Duhhh.... she had to ask. Thank God it will never be her. I guess that would the President of the United States you screaming, whining, leftest, oxygen stealing piece of dog poop. Howard Dean? Sacrifice on an alter? Please don't hand that Vermontite screaming witch doctor a machette. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2005-10-31 16:28 |
| #8 Opss --- lesson learned. Don't take a phone call when commenting in Rantburg! |
| Posted by: Sherry 2005-10-31 16:10 |
| #7 Notice how the Dems have picked up on that word "weakness"... the same word Rush used about Harriet |
| Posted by: Sherry 2005-10-31 16:09 |
| #6 Notice how the Dems have picked up on that word "weakness"... the same word Rush used about Harriet |
| Posted by: Sherry 2005-10-31 16:09 |
| #5 Please pass the popcorn. |
| Posted by: Clavith Uninemble9096 2005-10-31 15:46 |
| #4 Phasers set to "babble". |
| Posted by: Seafarious 2005-10-31 15:38 |
| #3 Ed, it's more efficient that way. Learn once and regurgitate. |
| Posted by: Steve White 2005-10-31 15:36 |
| #2 Sounds like the exact same arguments they made when Miers was announced. |
| Posted by: ed 2005-10-31 15:31 |
| #1 Dems are lookin' for that mainstream Judge who fall somewhere between Marx and Mao. |
| Posted by: macofromoc 2005-10-31 15:13 |