Wednesday, July 20, 2005
Roberts and Schumer (and the Vatican)
Conservatives who are dancing in the streets need to settle down. Judge Roberts had this to say about Roe v. Wade during his last round of confirmation hearings:
"Roe v. Wade is the settled law of the land... Theres is nothing in my personal views that would prevent me from fully and faithfully applying that precedent."
As for Schumer's reaction to the appointment, what is interesting is that finally I have read the truth. In other words, for the first time, a known high ranking liberal Senator has spoken the truth about the intentions of liberals as it comes to the courts:
"Now that he is nominated for a position where he can overturn precedent and make law, it is even more important that he fully answers a very broad range of questions."
MAKE LAW! And I always thought that was in Schumer's job description and not that of any judge at any level.
Oh, by the way, the Vatican has taken another swipe at strict Darwinian evolution (the randomness line).
"Roe v. Wade is the settled law of the land... Theres is nothing in my personal views that would prevent me from fully and faithfully applying that precedent."
As for Schumer's reaction to the appointment, what is interesting is that finally I have read the truth. In other words, for the first time, a known high ranking liberal Senator has spoken the truth about the intentions of liberals as it comes to the courts:
"Now that he is nominated for a position where he can overturn precedent and make law, it is even more important that he fully answers a very broad range of questions."
MAKE LAW! And I always thought that was in Schumer's job description and not that of any judge at any level.
Oh, by the way, the Vatican has taken another swipe at strict Darwinian evolution (the randomness line).
Comments:
<< Home
I am more concerned with Judge Roberts second sentence than his first. While Roe v. Wade is the law of the land and we as law abiding citizens acknowledge its passage, our personal feelings/beliefs are that the law is morally wrong. It does not respect life and its places personal choice on a higher plane than the sanctity of life. That is what I would have liked Roberts to say.
Schumer on the other hand is already on the attack. He applies a different standard than that applied to Ginsberg! Why is only Roberts able to overturn precedent and make law while the other 8 plus Roberts predecessor weren't. T Kennedy wants another "conservative" on the court like O'Connor. Both are windbags. My hope is that the public once and for all realizes it.
Post a Comment
Schumer on the other hand is already on the attack. He applies a different standard than that applied to Ginsberg! Why is only Roberts able to overturn precedent and make law while the other 8 plus Roberts predecessor weren't. T Kennedy wants another "conservative" on the court like O'Connor. Both are windbags. My hope is that the public once and for all realizes it.
# posted by 
: 4:06 PM
: 4:06 PM << Home
