Other views: High court nominee to face liberals' bag of nasty tricks
Now that Justice Sandra Day O'Connor has resigned from the U.S. Supreme Court, President Bush will have an opportunity to appoint a strict constructionist to the court. He will nominate someone that he believes will interpret law and refrain from...
Now that Justice Sandra Day O'Connor has resigned from the U.S. Supreme Court, President Bush will have an opportunity to appoint a strict constructionist to the court. He will nominate someone that he believes will interpret law and refrain from imposing personal policy preferences on the rest of the citizenry. President Bush, as do most conservatives, believes more in the "collective wisdom" of the people than he does in the social policy dictates of a legal oligarchy that is the U.S. Supreme Court.
Many of us have angrily watched as this body has arrogantly overruled the elected representatives of the people on a host of social policy issues. It has upheld the barbaric practice of partial birth abortion; it has made abortion on demand the law of the land; it has disallowed the people the right to define marriage; it has shown a strong hostility toward religious expression in the public square; it has approved the seizing of private property by other private property owners; and it has passively stood by as a human being was dehydrated to death despite all sorts of "reasonable doubt" about the husband's ability to serve as a legitimate legal guardian.
Because liberals, who support such a horrible agenda, know it could never pass at the ballot box, they will go to whatever lengths possible to stop a conservative appointment by President Bush. Some will outright lie, some will assassinate the character of the nominee, some will tell half-truths, some will obstruct and some will try to intimidate those of us who support such a nomination. The mainstream media, who generally support these awful views, will slant its coverage to portray President Bush' nomination in a most negative light.
When viewing this coverage, remember that there is no conservative candidate that will be found acceptable by these extreme liberals. They want to continue, through the court, to impose their views on the rest of us.
Remember also that conservatives in the Senate have not acted in kind. When extremist Ruth Bader Ginsburg was nominated to the court by President Clinton, 40 of 43 of Republicans voted in favor of her appointment. This despite their knowledge of the fact that she was a former director of the ACLU, a supporter of same-sex marriage and a supporter of abortion on demand. Republicans did this because they believe elections have consequences and that the Constitution gives the president the right to make this appointment.
President Bush campaigned on this issue by saying he would like to appoint justices in the vein of Justice Antonen Scalia and Justice Clarence Thomas. Conservatives, unlike liberals, are not trying to do anything covert here. They want President Bush to appoint, as he said he would, a conservative judge. They want a fair hearing and they want and expect a vote by each and every senator that makes up the U.S. Senate. Be aware that many liberals will use every dishonest trick in the book to keep this from happening.
Schaible lives in Fargo. E-mail email@example.com