"Then you will know the Truth, and the Truth will set you free." John 8:32

Monday, October 31, 2005

Alito Steps Up

Judge Alito is a great nominee and will make a great justice on SCOTUS in the vein of Scalia and Thomas. For a brief overview of Judge Alito's qualifications, see Ed Whalen's post at Bench Memo at National Review. Additional information about Alito is available at ConfirmThem's right column and here. I believe the President hit a home run with Alito. He was on my short list of four: Luttig, Janice Rogers Brown, McConnell and Alito. I still think Miers would have been a good justice but I believe a nomination from one the aforementioned list will make a great one. In addition, the President has given the elites on the right what they hoped for in his nomination of Judge Alito.

A great political battle lies ahead as liberals are already in a tizzy. Democrats and liberals are already attacking Alito, the son of an immigrant and a public school teacher. It has nothing to do with Judge Alito's qualifications to be a justice, which are self-evident, but it intrigues me that the left ignores a great American success story in their furious condemnations of Judge Alito. Chuck Schumer has stooped to a new low and said he sees the possibility that as a justice of SCOTUS, Alito would roll back the achievements of Rosa Parks. So Schumer has essentially labeled Alito as a racist. Unbelievable... Why does the left get a pass from MSM when someone like Schumer has the gall to debase the life of Ms. Parks by politicizing her death. It is outrageous and is indicative of the kind of fight that is potentially looming in the Senate during the confirmation process. With a filibuster looking very probable from Democrats in the Senate, will the so-called gang of 14 follow through with their promise of not supporting fillibusters? We may yet see the constitutional option, the "nuclear" option, finally used to to bring some sanity in the Senate. I hope Judge Alito is tough skinned. I look forward to him serving on SCOTUS.

Thursday, October 27, 2005

Miers Steps Down

The elites did it. Miers withdrew her name from the nomination for SCOTUS. I wish she had not done so but I understand. I hope elite pundits on the right are happy. But somehow I don't think so. Now the left accuses the President of giving into the ideologues of the elite right and Bush will probably now give the elite pundits on the right what they want in his next nomination. I am beginning to believe that our country is governed by elites that couldn't care less about the average American, only the god of their ideologies. I am as conservative as most of the pundits on the right are, if not more so. But I refuse to be ruled by elitists that try to tell me how to think and live. The Constitution gives the President the right to nominate the person he chooses for the SCOTUS. Ms. Miers deserved an up or down vote in the Senate, not to be villified in the press by elitists. Maybe the next nominee will receive better treatment than she did. I doubt it though.

Wednesday, October 26, 2005

What Goes Around Comes Around

I don't know about you, but I am sick and tired of elites on ANY side trying to tell me what to think and do. The chorus of elites on the right that continue to try and weaken Bush's position and decisions when he appoints judicial nominees makes me want to vomit. The elite pundits on the right have now elevated this argument over the appointment of Miers to a point where the debate over her credentials and ability to be an originalist is mute. The elite pundits on the right are now all part of the same problem that grips Washington. I, too, had hoped for an appointee that was based totally on an ability to interpret law when comparing it to the Constitution with no regard to sex, race or anything to do with diversity or quotas. I, too, had wanted an appointee to the SCOTUS that would help reverse the social engineering that has been going by liberals for 40 years. But the President has chosen an appointee that he believes upholds his promise to appoint judges that interpret law and not make law. To see and hear the elite pundits on the right try and force the President to make a change is ludicrous and damages the party. Elites like Rush, Ingram, Wills and others are tearing the base apart and hurting our chances to further establish a long-lasting majority in Federal government. They are blinded by ideology and puffed-up self-serving interests. Who are they to tell me that I am trusting the President in a blind and uninformed manner! Give me a break... I can't tell the difference between them and the elites on the left. Shameful. The President is a focused leader and will not bend to the cacophony of howling by any so-called elite pundits. If we're not careful, conservatives will be seen increasingly by a fickle electorate as unable to govern and will be tossed out just like the liberals.

Wednesday, October 05, 2005

Blather's Bane

This IBM Selectric Composer was discovered in the corner of Dan Blather's old CBS office after he vacated the premises. A gift card was still attached that read: "Thanks for helping with the props Dan! Ever Yours... Mary" Whatever that meant is known only to Blather.

Both Sides of the Same Coin

The toxin that spews forth from the elite on the right astounds me. To listen to the pundits on the right that are crying about the President's choice of Harriet Miers for the Supreme Court you would think that Bush has changed parties or switched positions on his opinions about abortion or gay marriage. Nothing is further from the truth.

I understand the intense desire to put a constitutional scholar of the magnitude of Scalia on the court and shove it up the liberals nose. When two positions on the SCOTUS became available I, like many conservatives, was smiling with glee and saw the golden opportunity to finally change a court that had become a liberal bastion of social change and activism.

The President is fulfilling his promise to appoint judges that will interpret law and not legislate from the bench. All indications indicate he has done a great job of that and has been consistent in his appointments. What is there about the nomination of Harriet Miers that gives any kind of indication that he has changed his philosophy? I have heard all the arguments from pundits and the self-appointed guardians of conservative values and I reject their arguments. The vile poison they are spewing will do nothing but hurt the party, give the liberals and democrats more ammunition in the mid-term elections and further alienate the base of conservative supporters. PLEASE HEAR THIS LOUD AND CLEAR! It was the ELECTORATE that put Bush in office and NOT the elite pundits. Whenever the liberals and democrats complain and whine about Bush the pundits are always the first to remind us that Bush won the election and that he has the right to chose whomever he wishes for any post he has the authority to appoint for. WHAT'S DIFFERENT NOW?

The President does not have to pick anyone according to the pundits requirements and there is nothing anywhere that requires an appointee to have judicial experience. If the attacks on the the President keep up, the base may become disenchanted even further and we will lose what ground we have made in Congress. THIS IS A MARATHON! This is not a 100 yard dash.

The elite pundits are acting like spoiled brats at Christmas that didn't get exactly what they want. Have we conservatives become so drunk with perceived power that we whine and throw a temper tantrum when we don't get our way? Shameful. I can't tell the difference between loud-mouth, whiny, liberal elites and loud-mouth, whiny conservative elites.

Go see what Impacted Wisdom Truth has to say about the whiny pundits. Also check out Hugh. He's been the voice of reason in all of this.

Elitism is elitism. They are both sides of the same coin.

Monday, October 03, 2005

A Good Choice

Harriet Miers is a good choice to fill the open seat on the Supreme Court. When you understand her personality and realize that the President knows her very well, you will then see she is a solid conservative choice.

There are two reasons why I support the President's choice:

1) Harriet apparently lives a faith that views the scriptures as the authority of God, a fundamentalist. In today's PC world, being called a fundamentalist can be looked at in derision so more people are comfortable with calling Harriet an evangelical. Harriet has been a long-time active member of the Valley View Christian Church in Dallas and this indicates to me she has a profound respect for the writers of the Bible. Her views on life for the most part must reflect her agreement with and acceptance of the scriptures or she would have been too uncomfortable to continue worshipping in a Christian Church. The Christian churches are similar in beliefs to the Churches of Christ, of which I am an elder. Most of the congregations of the the Christian Church are conservative in nature and this encourages me about her world view since she is an active member at Valley View. While this is no guarantee of her judicial viewpoints it perhaps is a positive indication that her views of the social ills that face our country are also seen through her knowledge and understanding of spiritual truths. Most importantly, I think this indicates that she would have a more literal interpretation of the Constitution and not see it as a "living" document the way the left does. I like what Marvin Olasky writes about her in World Magazine's blog.

2) Bush knows Harriet well and trusts her. He has seen her up close in action within the White House and has judged her opinions and beliefs to be in line with his own. She made the transition from one party to another at about the same time her fundamental faith became active. The President has undoubtedly had discussions of her viewpoints with her and deemed them compatible with his own. The first President Bush didn't know David Souter and he got burned because he trusted the advice of others. Conservatives who decry the choice of Harriet Miers are basing their reaction on the past and not on the evidence. This President KNOWS Harriet and I trust President Bush.

We need judges on our courts that take a strict constructionist view of the Constitution and not consider themselves agents of change to impose their view on the public. While the elites on the left would vomit at the notion that a fundamentalist would be a good jurist, I am happy about it and willing to trust President Bush's knowledge of Harriet as a good choice to fill a vacancy on the Supreme Court. I think she would interpret the Constitution in the same manner as she does the Bible, not as a "living" and changing document subject to culture and the whims of those in authority but as the basis and foundation of applying principles that are etched in the hearts and minds of those willing to submit to it's authority. In other words, she would interpret the Constitution as a strict constructionist, a fundamentalist. I believe Bush has thrown a high and tight fastball right under the left's nose.