Sunday, December 4, 2011

Obstruction in the Judiciary Committee


By Charles A. Morse
web posted May 27, 2002

Senator Orrin B. Hatch (R-UT) Chairman of the Senate
Judiciary Committee is blaming "very liberal Senate Democrats"
for a "vacancy crisis" on the federal bench. Hatch also blames
"outside, extreme-left, special interest groups" for launching
"invidious attacks" on the judicial nominees of President George
W. Bush. Examples include the recent ugly smear campaign
against the nominations of Mississippi Judge Thomas Pickering
and the present tarring and feathering of Pennsylvania Judge D.
Brooks Smith.

The left-wing obstructionist Senators and their "special interest"
backers are performing auto da fe's on Bush's distinguished
judicial nominees in order to stop the seating of judges who,
heaven forefend, might apply strict constitutional standards when
interpreting cases that come before them. The method employed
usually involves the dredging up of old and irrelevant utterances
or actions by the nominee, which are held up as proof of hidden
racism or sexism. The Clarence Thomas carnival was a classic
example of this ugly tactic on display.

The witch-hunt effectively destroys, or at least seriously weakens
a prospective nominee who is not deemed to be politically
correct. The hi-tech lynching also sends a chilling message to the
public at large which is that if this distinguished, accomplished
and strong public figure can be publicly humiliated and
disemboweled for committing the sin of not goose-stepping to
political correctness, think carefully before you stray off the
reservation or you will be next. Senator Joseph R. McCarthy
was vociferously accused of using these types of tactics back in
the 1950's during his investigation of communist subversives in
government. Calling Bush's nominee's racist is the equivalent of
calling a person a communist because he might have once been
spotted in a hotel lobby standing next to Alger Hiss.

The leftist agenda is to preserve a judiciary stacked with left-
wing judges willing to use their appointed positions to
unflinchingly, and by fiat, enact unpopular and undemocratic
laws. The Constitution clearly calls for an elected Congress to
make law while the appointed judiciary is supposed to ensure
that the laws, enacted by the people's representatives in
Congress, conform to the Constitution. The regressive left wants
judges to act like monarchs by wielding fiat power in violation of
the letter and spirit of their oath of office. This is because the left
must depend on dictatorial power since they tacitly understand
that their regressive agenda would never fly with the electorate.

The most glimmering jewel in the leftist crown is the protection of
their bloody abortions and the expansion of the definition of
abortion to include a killing of a child within seconds of birth.
Control of human life and death, fundamentally, is the very
cornerstone of leftism, which is a political philosophy that is
entirely animated by absolute power and control. Support for a
culture of death, whether it involves abortion, euthanasia, suicide,
drugs, pre-marital sex, homosexuality or pornography is critical
to the left's long-term goal of social control of the masses. A
judge who might question the efficacy of any of these sacred
cows, especially on religious conviction, is viewed as a person
who must be silenced. An individual, who publicly adheres to
moral standards, especially if those standards derive from faith, is
"an enemy of the people" in the inverted and crazy quilt world of
the left.

The Constitution says nothing about a right to abort a human
fetus, only the right to life. A moral society is one that protects
every human life. Having said this, the undoing of Roe vs. Wade
on constitutional grounds, which is what the left fears, would not
result in an outright ban on all abortions nor should it. The issue
of abortion policy and regulation would, like capital punishment,
be returned to the States where the elected representatives in
each respective state would vote on legislation that would most
closely reflect the will of the citizenry of the state. This process is
the essence of democracy in practice something the left likes to
prattle about when it fits their agenda.

No comments: