Skip to comments.Ending the Holocaust of the Innocents
Posted on 11/17/2004 7:10:42 AM PST by Manic_Episode
Ending the Holocaust of Innocents
Prophecy - Signs Tuesday, November 16, 2004 Jack Kinsella - Omega Letter Editor
Abortion 'rights' tops the agenda for both parties when the new Senate is seated on January 3rd. Specifically, whether or not judicial nominees will be denied confirmation based on some kind of abortion 'litmus test'.
It takes a simple majority -- 51-49 -- in the Senate to confirm a judicial appointee. But the Senate rules allow for what is called a 'filibuster' -- which demands a 'cloture' -- a 'super-majority' 60-40 -- to overcome.
"Filibuster" is defined by Legal-Definitions.com as "the use of deliberate and delaying tactics, such as a long, pointless speech, in an attempt to interfere or obstruct with a legal action, such as passing a law in the U.S. Senate."
Filibusters became business as usual at the Senate ever since the Democrats became the minority party in the Senate in 2002. Since then, virtually every conservative nominee for a judicial appointment has been blocked.
While the liberals on the Senate deny having a 'litmus test' for judicial confirmations, any nominee who has ever expressed a pro-life worldview can expect their nomination to be threatened with a filibuster.
On the other hand, any nominee who made it known that he favors abortion on demand could, heretofore, expect a speedy confirmation.
An actual filibuster is rare -- one hasn't been seen in more than 15 years -- because the side lacking the 60 votes needed to end one usually acquiesces. The current, quasi-filibuster only continues while the Senate is actually in session, allowing Senators to leave the Capitol at the end of each day.
Still, Democrats have blocked 10 of Bush's lower court picks, employing the threat of filibuster as their weapon of choice.
Republicans -- who are infuriated by the delay -- have vowed to force the Democrats into an actual filibuster over the appointment of Miguel Estrada to the DC US Court of Appeals.
Only one Democratic Senator -- Zell Miller of Georgia -- has indicated he would vote for Estrada or to end the filibuster of his nomination. Although Estrada has never been a judge, he has argued 15 cases before the Supreme Court and had an impressive legal career.
The reason the Democrats oppose Estrada's appointment is because he refuses to disclose his view regarding abortion on demand.
Estrada claims his appointment should be based on his qualifications -- which are impressive. Estrada has argued fifteen cases before the Supreme Court for the government.
An immigrant from Honduras who arrived in America penniless at age 16, Estrada worked his way through Columbia Law School, graduating with high honors. He served as a law clerk to Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy. He was a federal prosecutor in New York as well as an assistant Solicitor-General of the United States.
That isn't enough to qualify Estrada in the eyes of the Senate partisans. To be confirmed, Estrada pretty much has to promise to support abortion 'rights' -- or face a confirmation battle.
The current session of the Senate is what is known as a 'lame duck' session because several Senators won't still be in office when the Senate reconvenes.
(For example, Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle lost his bid for re-election, becoming the first party leader to be defeated for reelection in more than a half-century. On January 3rd, the senator from his district in North Dakota will be Republican Jim Thune.)
In the current session, the Republicans control the majority by one vote -- 51-49. On January 3rd, they will control the majority 55-44 -- an impressive majority, but not enough to overcome a filibuster by invoking the cloture rule.
(The remaining seat is occupied by Independent James Jeffords of Vermont -- a liberal who always votes with the Democrats.)
In essence, by threatening to filibuster a nomination, the Democrats can ignore the simple majority rule in the Senate and create a new paradigm in the Senate in which a super-majority is the only majority that counts.
(Which proves Democrats only think every vote should count when it favors them -- the textbook difference between pure democracy and the American Republic established by the Founding Fathers.)
In this term, it is likely that President Bush will nominated as many as four new justices to the Supreme Court. Chief Justice William Rehnquist, who is in his eighties, was just diagnosed with thyroid cancer, will likely be the first vacancy.
But Rehnquist is a solid vote against abortion 'rights', so replacing him is unlikely to alter the 5-4 pro-abortion majority on the bench.
On the other hand, Justice Steven Breyer-- who voted in favor of Roe v. Wade is also likely to retire or die in this term. Breyer is the Court's staunchest supporter of abortion rights. Justices John Paul Stevens and swing-voter Sandra Day O'Conner are also likely to leave the bench in this term.
The two most significant cases dealing with abortion rights in the last decade have been decided by the narrowest of margins, a vote of 5-4.
To quote an alarmed liberal editorialist from Newsday, "Abortion foes are just one Supreme Court justice away from victory."
Judicial appointments are referred to the full Senate by the Senate Judicial Committee. The nominal chairman of that committee, based on seniority, is slated to be Republican Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania. The current chairman, Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah, is stepping down because of term limits.
Specter, although a Republican, supports abortion 'rights'. Shortly after Bush's reelection, Specter told CNN:
"When you talk about judges who would change the right of a woman to choose, overturn Roe v. Wade, I think that is unlikely . . The president is well aware of what happened, when a number of his nominees were sent up, with the filibuster," Specter added, referring to pro-abortion Democrats' successes over the past four years in blocking the confirmation of many of Bush's conservative judicial picks.
"... And I would expect the president to be mindful of the considerations which I am mentioning."
His remarks were widely interpreted as a warning to President Bush to refrain from selecting Supreme Court nominees who opposed abortion rights.
Specter has been practicing damage control ever since as conservatives have banded together to oppose his succession to the Judicial Committee Chair.
Abortion 'rights' is an example of the 'tyranny of the majority' warned of by the Founding Fathers. Unrestricted abortion has been the law of the land for more than three decades during the mainly Democratic domination of both Houses of Congress.
Even after losing the majority, they have consistently opposed pro-life legislation by using whatever tactics necessary, from outright lies to the threat of filibuster.
Democratic appointees to the Supreme Court in 1973 constituted a 7-2 majority when Roe v. Wade was decided. To the Democrats, that still equates to majority support for abortion. Things have changed.
According to a June, 2000 poll conducted by the ultra-liberal Los Angeles Times, fifty-seven percent of respondents said they believed that abortion is murder. Fifty-seven percent! Only 43% of respondents in that poll supported the Roe v. Wade decision.
Princeton Survey Research Associates conducted a telephone survey among women for the pro-abortion Center for Gender Equality in 1998. Fifty-three percent of women according to that poll OPPOSE abortion.
A CBS poll conducted in July 2003 showed that fully 62% of Americans either oppose abortion altogether or believe it should be strictly limited.
A December 2003 poll conducted by Zogby asked the question; "Do you agree with the statement; "Abortion destroys a human life and is manslaughter?"
Sixty-two percent said yes. Fifty-five percent of Americans agreed with the statement; "Life begins at conception."
"If My people, which are called by My name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek My Face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land." (2nd Chronicles 7:14)
On Election Day, the majority pro-life American voters put a pro-life Republican in the White House. American voters increased the pro-life majorities in both House of Congress, knowing full well that their decision will also mean a pro-life majority on the Supreme Court.
The majority has shifted. Thank You, Jesus.
too bad the majority isn't going to mean squat because of Specter. As for those polls, while it is encouraging that so many people recognize abortion is murder, believe it or not, a good number of people both believe it is murder and that it should be legal. Boggles my mind, but it's true. I would like to see a poll about how many people would be in favor of overturning Roe v Wade.
I think the author speaks much too soon in assuming our Rat congressfolk in either party will adhere to the will of the people.
End the filibuster. It's too bad that Frist had to call this his 'nuclear option'..this just gives the old media a sound bite to harp on.
I don't believe only 55% believe a unique human life begins at conception.
I think that some have confused "legal person-hood" with "human being".
One of the indicators of person-hood: prosecution for murder for the intentional non-defensive killing of same. Most would not prosecute for first degree murder a fertility clinic tech who destroys an 8-celled "excess zygote".