Yes, I am sure a gaggillion (slightly more then a shatload) of people have mentioned John F’ing Kerry call for a filibuster of Alito. I wonder if it is a promise similar to Kerry saying he would release his full Form 180’s? Well, that is for another day, specifically Monday, when it will be a full year since he said that.
But, I digress. From Kerry’s gov’t sponsored webpage
“I support a filibuster of Judge Alito’s nomination. Judge Alito’s confirmation would be an ideological coup on the Supreme Court. We can’t afford to see the Court’s swing vote, Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, replaced with a far-right ideologue like Samuel Alito.
“Judge Alito will take America backward, especially when it comes to civil rights and discrimination laws. His record speaks for itself. Rather than live up to the promise of ‘equal justice under the law,’ Judge Alito has consistently made it harder for Americans to have their day in court. He routinely defers to the power of the government, no matter how extreme. And he doesn’t believe women have a right to privacy that’s protected by the Constitution.
“The President has every right to nominate Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court. It’s our right and our responsibility to oppose him vigorously and to fight against this radical upending of the Supreme Court.â€
Paragraph one says it all. He opposes Judge Alito on an ideological basis. Kerry tries to meander down a road that maybe there some issues with the Judges record, but it is clear that Kerry cannot find any problems with Alito’s abilities as a judge. Just his ideological leanings.
In paragraph three, Kerry starts out correctly. The duly elected President of the USA does have that right. But why is it the Left’s right and responsibility to oppose him vigorously and to fight? Could it be because the Left has nothing else to offer? And because, since they cannot win elections, they have to attempt to push their socialistic and often "push America last" policies through the Courts?
Would we be having this conversation if Kerry had won the election on 11/2/04? Or would the GOP Senators have said "you won the election, Mr. Kerry, so as long as the person is qualified, ala Ginsburg, we will consent." So far, the Dems in the Senate, including Kerry, really haven’t provided advice, just whining. We didn’t expect their consent.
The better for the GOP if they do filibuster. No matter how the Exempt Media spins it, the American People, who generally are not into politics like we are, will see the Dem party at its normal: obstructionist, with nothing else to offer.
BTW, John, you lost the election. In 20+ years, you have passed a wopping 12 pieces of legislation, most of which was fluff. Heck, there are many who have passed more then that last year alone. Maybe you should try doing something positive for a change.
Oh, and don’t forget Ted Kennedy is calling for one, too. But Teddy won’t attempt to run for President in 2008 like Kerry will.
Others off my blogroll:
More: One of the cats over at This Blog Is Full of Crap has an interesting piece on Kerry. No lizards, though, so I will assume it wasn’t Nardo.
And you notice sHillary is not — the Democrat nominee for 2008 is waiting to see which way the wind blows before she takes up her position. I wouldn’t be surprised to see her abstain from this vote.
Very well could be.
I still say that she will not even get a sniff of the nomination.