Truth Out Loud

January 30, 2006

Filibuster slapped down

In the end it wasn't even close but Kerry did manage to cement his credentials with the fever swamp left and Ted Kennedy cemented his ties to the hopelessly insane.

On a 72-25 vote, senators succeeded in passing the 60-vote threshold to prevent a filibuster and allow a simple majority vote Tuesday. At least 57 senators have said publicly they will vote for the nominee.

Posted by Sid at 06:00 PM | Comments (0) | Supreme Court

January 13, 2006

Somehow Alito cheated on his test by getting help

Of all things the left wing kook-o-sphere is now concerned that Alito got too much or the wrong kind of help in preparing for the hearings. This after democrats forced a month delay in the hearings in hopes of digging up dirt to sabotage his confirmation. Like Mydd.

For me, one of the most exciting moments of the Alito hearings was Senator Feingold demanding a list be made public of all the people who took part in Alito's preparations.

DailyKoS

This a serious ethical issue.

Do they think it impossible for a republican to be smarter then senators?

They also accuse him of not answering questions. How do you cheat on a test when you give no answers?

Then again, based on the performance of the democratic senators it may have been an inside job. Democratic spies may have given Alito a blank answer sheet and he did exactly what it said.

Posted by Sid at 12:23 AM | Comments (1) | Supreme Court

It's never too early to be a sexist

Posted by Sid at 12:01 AM | Comments (0) | Supreme Court

January 12, 2006

Democrat impotence against intelligent SCOTUS candidates

One of the most refreshing things about Bush SCOTUS appointments is that finally we may be moving away from the stealth candidate. The stealth candidate approach has been too smart by half because it backfires way too often. Stealth candidates have given us some of the most liberal judges to date such as David Souter. How he could in good conscience even accept nomination knowing in his heart he was not what his supporters hoped shows a dishonesty that is profound. Granted you can never know exactly how a person will be on a court but isn't it better if you can see them in action demonstrating their convictions and adherence to the constitution.

Watching Alito testify, and Roberts before him, has also highlighted how petty and ignorant democrats on the judiciary committee are. It is now plain to see that anyone, and I mean anyone can be a senator. Seeing them pontificating for 25 minutes and questioning for 5 minutes fishing for that "gotcha moment" where the witness breaks down and confesses all his sins is hilarious. You keep thinking they expect Alito to blurt out that he is a racist or wants women doing their own abortions in back alleys with rusty coat hangers. Do they really think these candidates are that bad or that stupid?

The classic was Joe Biden who sometimes seems to speak English as a second language saying he hated Princeton (several times) after giving a speech at Princeton less the two years ago praising the university and wishing his kids had gone there.

It's an honor to be here. It would have even been a greater honor to have gone here. I have three children who have merifully have all finally completed undergraduate and graduate school, and I tried to get all three of them to apply here...I committed a serious mistake, Dean. I've learned now, any advice I give...when you become parents, whatever school you want your child to go to, don't mention it. And so I had been pushing Princeton, and this magnificently attractive, intellectually and physically, beautiful young girl, was a sophomore, was showing us around, and I figured we've got a lock now. My son is going to really be interested, and I know Senators aren't supposed to say things like that, but if he hadn't been interested, I would have been worried...

Does this make Biden a sexist pig and homophobe? Can you tell someone is magnificently attractive intellectually by looking at them? When was the last time you heard someone say "Man, that gal has a nice pair of cerebral hemispheres on her." Also remember, Senator Lot lost his leadership position just for saying nice things to an old retiring college (much like Senator Byrd) who had a racist past. If not for the hearings I would have never learned this little gem of insight into Biden character.

Hopefully the lesson is learned. Send up a well qualified, intelligent candidate and you get a well qualified judge who will at least start as a known commodity. As a bonus you get to see democrats act the buffoons.

Posted by Sid at 12:55 AM | Comments (0) | Supreme Court

Calling Alito a bigot without saying the words

I have been watching reports on the confirmation hearings for Alito and am beginning to wonder why democrats cannot admit that they are trying to make Alito look like a bigot when almost all of their questioning insinuates that he is a bigot.

Democrats have been going at this from two directions. First, they use the tactics of their favorite whipping boy Joe McCarthy who was vilified for his "guilt by association" tactics by picking at Samuel Alito and his membership in CAP. CAP was not by any stretch the KKK. They opposed Princeton banning the ROTC and implementation of affirmative action requirements. Granted such an organization would probably attract some of the seedier elements but does the support of a bigot in a just cause invalidate that cause? Does this make you accountable for all the writings associated with the group? Then again, opposition to affirmative action and set asides for minorities is considered racism today so I guess in their minds he may be a bigot.

Second, democrats reviewed his case record and determined that he had never ruled in favor of a minority worker and against the employer. This is obviously not true as I know of at least one case where he did rule in favor of a minority claimant. Democrats for whatever reason find they must describe few as none to better make their flimsy case. But, even if he hadn't why would that be an indication of racism? Are judges to ensure that a certain percentage of minorities that come before them must have rulings in their favor? If affirmative action must be applied, how many or what percent of the rulings should go in favor of minorities? Must court judgments now be subjected to affirmative action requirements as well to address historical wrongs?

Lindsay Graham summed it up at the end.

GRAHAM: ...Are you really a closet bigot?
ALITO: I'm not any kind of a bigot, I'm not.

GRAHAM: No, sir, you're not. And you know why I believe that? Not because you just said it -- but that's a good enough reason, because you seem to be a decent, honorable man. I have got reams of quotes from people who have worked with you, African American judges -- I've lost my quotes.

At least McCarthy picked on people that were currently in association with admitted communists. The Democrats have to go back 20 years to find a thin association with CAP. If this is true evil they should probably have a talk with Senator Byrd who was an actual member of the KKK. The only thing that could make this democrat showing more ridiculous is if Byrd was asking these questions himself.

Posted by Sid at 12:14 AM | Comments (0) | Supreme Court

November 15, 2005

Alito - Constitution Does Not Protect a Right to an Abortion

The supreme court nomination of Alito is about to get radioactive.

WASHINGTON - Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito boasted about his work arguing that "the Constitution does not protect a right to an abortion" while trying to become a deputy assistant attorney general in the Reagan administration, according to documents released Monday.

Abortion and self blame paralasys for all the worlds woes are about all the democrats stand for.

Posted by Sid at 12:14 AM | Comments (4) | Supreme Court

November 01, 2005

Top 10 Reactions from the Left Over Sam Alito

10. Disappointment that it wasn't a female quota appointment.
9. Disappointment fixation because Carl Rove was not indicted.
8. Implied mafia connections.
7. Longing for the good old days when Miers was the nominee.
6. Disappointment that Bush has forced them to stage a bitter fight.
5. Using the nickname Scalito which is a complement in conservative circles.
4. Disappointment that Bush did not unite the nation with their choice.
3. Defining living up to campaign promises as presidential weakness.
2. Disappointment Bush didn't flip off his base.
1. DailyKOS obscenity laced tirades.

Posted by Sid at 12:37 AM | Comments (0) | Supreme Court

October 31, 2005

Sam Alito for SCOTUS

Bush has nominated Sam Alito as the replacement for Sandra O'Conner on the Supreme Court of the United States. Alito is a solid conservative based on past judgments, impeccable credentials and soft spoken. Nicknamed Scalito by some with a temperament and style much like John Roberts he should be a pick that will unify Bush’s’ base and irritate the crap out of democrats even though he was confirmed to his current position unanimously. It will be interesting to see them now turn around and make him Satan’s child.

Let the fun begin. I think this will be the fight that has been brewing for decades because conscientious conservatives who believe their cause is just and true to our nations founding principles have gotten tired of having to sneak past sniveling liberals who treat the U.S. Constitution as more of a guideline then the law of the land. This could finally put the Supreme Court back in its box and out of business as an appointed super-legislature.

Posted by Sid at 07:02 AM | Comments (0) | Supreme Court

October 28, 2005

Let a Democrat President Nominate Miers for SCOTUS if Shes so Great

Considering the outrage being expressed by Democrats on behalf of Harriet Miers I think the next Democrat president should nominate Miers for SCOTUS in an effort to teach the so-called right wing conservatives that they have no right to impugn the reputation of an exemplary candidate. Watching outraged Democrats in the senate and elsewhere come to her defense is a riot. They don’t care one bit about her other then now they have to worry about a true conservative being nominated in her stead.

To make it easier, the precedent is already available. George Bush, in an effort to show good faith with congressional democrats, re-nominated two of Bill Clinton’s appointee’s. Combine that with the fact that she was recommended in the first place by Democrats she should be the obvious choice.

Enough of this railing about George Bush being unable to repudiate his own base, the Democrats should step up later and rectify this great injustice.

The reality is, the democrats outrage is faux, their motives are political and their own base is so whacked it keeps them leashed to idiocy.

Carnival of the Trackbacks XXXV

Posted by Sid at 12:14 AM | Comments (0) | Supreme Court

October 27, 2005

Harriet Miers Withdraws

Probably for the best. I get the impression she was about to get steamrolled during senate confirmation.

With the Plame investigation heating up and Miers obvious lack of base support this was a self inflicted struggle the administration did not need. Let’s hope they will make a more appropriate choice next time. The base is itching to back Bush on a true conservative nominee with a background.

From what I have been able to determine from events, Miers was about to be ambushed in Senate confirmation hearings by democrats over the cronyism, Texas lottery, James Dobson and demands for privileged executive discussions with Bush on policy decisions. Bush may have dodged a bullet here. The democrats had way too much information with which to make this a circus. Many on the left are also dismayed because they worry a true conservative will now be nominated. Let’s hope Bush doesn't use this opportunity to nominate Gonzales in retaliation. This can all become a bad memory with the right choice.

I hope the Miers supporters show the party unity they complained the Miers critics didn't. It is no time for sour grapes.

Posted by Sid at 06:05 AM | Comments (0) | Supreme Court

October 14, 2005

At This Point Bush Better Not Withdraw Miers Nomination

While I have not been too particularly impressed with the Harriet Miers nomination for the Supreme Court I think Bush better stick with her at this point. Backing out now would just be confirming charges of weakness with proof positive of weakness.

I don't think the current criticisms are about withdrawal so much as just a general level of disappointment at a mediocre crony selection. When the other justices start sending her out to get coffee and donuts while they do the heavy lifting don't come crying to me. Hopefully he (and any future Republican president) will take this as an example of what not to do next time and make better future choices. By that I mean NO ALBERTO GONZALES. We could even call it "being Miered" as opposed to "being Borked".

I intend to ignore further attempts to justify this nomination as I find them insulting, embarrassing and irrelevant. It's a shame the administration feels the need to flush their credibility down the drain by even making them.

Besides, I have a lunch bet with our lawyer at the office that Miers sticks it out and makes it on the court. Forget her qualifications, I don't want to loose that bet so she better get confirmed. The stakes are just too high now to back down.

Posted by Sid at 12:06 AM | Comments (1) | Supreme Court

October 12, 2005

He Picked John Roberts and See How That Turned Out

If I hear one more person try to defend the Harriot Miers nomination by saying "Trust Bush, he picked John Roberts and see how that turned out" I will scream. John Roberts is still a complete unknown. Quit acting like he now has a long record proving his credentials. Hugh Hewitt is the worst about this but others have pushed it as well.

Bush re-nominated two Clinton judges in a political calculation and signed the McCain-Feingold Campaign finance bill limiting free speech. He sacrificed principle long ago on constitutional issues.

In the end things may end up just fine but please don't insult my intelligence.

Posted by Sid at 11:59 AM | Comments (0) | Supreme Court