Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Durbin: Pro-Life Stance Would 'Disqualify' Roberts
NewsMax ^ | 7/24/05 | Limbacher

Posted on 07/24/2005 10:06:46 AM PDT by Tumbleweed_Connection

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-79 last
To: Tumbleweed_Connection
Keep it up, Dick, and you will be the first incumbent Democrat Senator from Illinois to be defeated in the general elections in history.

Please, keep it up.

51 posted on 07/24/2005 11:20:35 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum (Drug prohibition laws spawned the runaway federal health care monopoly and fund terrorism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection

In a real sense Durbin's position sheds light on how librals think, which is to say they don't, rather they 'feel' their way thru life and assume everyone else does too.

The whole idea here is that a Judge needs to way the evidence and base his decision using the Constitution as his or her guide. But Durbin's libralized paranoid thinking implies that if a Judge has a personal opinion then that opinion will guide his judgement and not the evidence, Constitution and his intellect.'


52 posted on 07/24/2005 11:25:49 AM PDT by SeaBiscuit (God Bless all who defend America and Friends, the rest can go to hell.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Polybius

God Almighty; maybe you should be nominated for the SCoTUS rarly if ever have I communicated with such a brilliant constitutional scholar. (by the way will you pay my motel bill after I point out this gym of wisdom to my nag.... wife?


53 posted on 07/24/2005 11:33:14 AM PDT by kublia khan (absolute war brings total victory)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Piquaboy
Russert is a Rat in disguise

Hell, he dosent try to disguise anything. He's a true blue loony

54 posted on 07/24/2005 11:38:54 AM PDT by ThreePuttinDude (Allah, is not... Akbar)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Lawgvr1955
Yes, a salvo from the Vatican to withhold communion from politicians openly pro-choice would be welcome. Ooops. I guess we already had that statement. OK, let's see it enforced and reported on by the More-than-Socialist Media.

HF

55 posted on 07/24/2005 11:43:14 AM PDT by holden (holden awnuhnuh truth, de whole truth, 'n nuttin' but de truth)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection

This Durbin guy is a known AlQaida agent. Why do the MSM bother reporting on his belches.


56 posted on 07/24/2005 11:45:51 AM PDT by muawiyah (/ hey coach do I gotta' put in that "/sarcasm " thing again?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: river rat
Having a minimum IQ score to seek public office would disqualify Durbin.
57 posted on 07/24/2005 11:46:30 AM PDT by BW2221
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: timydnuc
The irony is that Dickie Durbin wouldn't be in the Senate today if he hadn't first been elected to Congress as a PRO-LIFE Democrat when he was running in a swing district back in the 70s and 80s.

I guess Dickie Durbin was "not qualified" to be a Congressman in 1978 by his OWN limus test of "recognizing" the "fundemental right to privacy" in the Constitution post Roe v. Wade.

What a blowhard RAT partisan. This should definitely be an issue in his next campaign. I doubt you will find any Republican who says someone is unqualified for a government position based SOLELY on that person's view of "a woman's right to choose". For instance there are a number of officials who are pro-choice but conservative on everything else. And while I don't like pro-choice Stephen Breyer, I think he IS "qualified" for the Supreme Court (as is Sandra Day O'Conner and Anthony Kennedy). To be unqualified you have to be a real nutjob like Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

58 posted on 07/24/2005 11:56:00 AM PDT by BillyBoy (Find out about the Chicago Democrat Machine's "best friend" in the GOP... www.NoLaHood.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: river rat

Durbin, Kennedy and all the other moonbats better hope our recon STA/DA teams don't pay them a visit.

Semper Fi


59 posted on 07/24/2005 11:58:31 AM PDT by Fenris6 (3 Purple Hearts in 4 months w/o missing a day of work? He's either John Rambo or a Fraud)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: SeaBiscuit

The DOI states that as free humans all of us are entitled to LIFE, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness...


60 posted on 07/24/2005 12:02:44 PM PDT by Tumbleweed_Connection (I take the Ginsburg)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative

Yeah, just as Pro-Communist treason should bar Kerry from the Senate, but neither has happened yet...


61 posted on 07/24/2005 12:09:36 PM PDT by Schwaeky ("Truth is not determined by a majority vote" Pope Benedict XVI)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection
Russert goes strictly by the script. He doesn't like to go off into uncharted territory. That's why you don't see much in the way of followup questions.

As for Roberts, he only said "Roe & Wade" abortion law should not be at the Federal Level. There is nothing in the Constitution regarding it. It should be at the state level and each state will have to deal with it!

Roberts does not inject his persoanal opinion, he follows the laws in a strict matter.

62 posted on 07/24/2005 12:18:02 PM PDT by Sen Jack S. Fogbound
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection

LOL....all this while Dean wants to embrace pro life democrats and her heinous is spouting principles of life rather than death to the unborn.


63 posted on 07/24/2005 12:37:37 PM PDT by OldFriend (MERCY TO THE GUILTY IS CRUELTY TO THE INNOCENT ~ Adam Smith)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection
Dear Little Dick....

A majority of Illinois voters will soon disqualify YOU from having any say in the matter.

Have a nice day....

64 posted on 07/24/2005 12:40:06 PM PDT by Wings-n-Wind (The answers are out there; Wisdom is gained by asking the right questions)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection
"The DOI states that as free humans all of us are entitled to LIFE, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness..."

Right, but Dickwad Durbin isn't concerned with OUR rights, he is more concerned about the dubious rights of savage American murdering terrorists down in gitmo than that of defenseless unborn babies, and will go so far as to slander our Military and the brave troops who put their lives on the line every day so we don't have to.
65 posted on 07/24/2005 12:45:32 PM PDT by SeaBiscuit (God Bless all who defend America and Friends, the rest can go to hell.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection

Religious litmus test, plain and simple.


66 posted on 07/24/2005 1:23:02 PM PDT by Unam Sanctam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection
One of the unfortunate things about the debate is that the press is unable to distinguish between the right to privacy and the constitutional issues involved in abortion.

The "right to privacy" is a construct from a number of literal provisions providing the right in individuals to be secure in their person including the fourth, fifth, and fourteenth amendments among others. And I believe such a right is a reasonable extension of personal rights to freedom and liberty preserved by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

The Constitutional question of abortion needs however to be addressed not only to the rights of the mother but also to the rights of the unborn child. The 14th Amendment provides that no person shall be deprived of life without due process of law. The factual question is when personhood begins. Although I strongly believe it is at conception, a court might well take extensive evidence on the question. But there is no doubt, as there was no doubt at common law, that an unborn child is entitled to protection of the law at some fairly early stage of pregnancy.

How the issue cuts as to Judge Roberts is not entirely clear. His testimony as a Court of Appeals nominee was properly that Supreme Court precident controls Appellate Court decisions. A Supreme Court Justice gets to decide the applicability and correctness of precident as a Constitutional application.

We presently have no idea how Roberts views the rights of the unborn child. Neither do we know where he stands on Second Amendment rights; or Property rights; or for that matter much of anything else. We do get a general idea that he thinks the federal government has some very broad powers to invade individual freedom and liberty without regard to what the Constitution says which in my view is bad.

Under circumstances where we have available some clear outstanding candidates, Luttig; Edith Jones, Janice Brown to name three; it is inexcusable that this administration has choosen to submit a nominee who is the same kind of blank slate David Souter was.

67 posted on 07/24/2005 4:35:10 PM PDT by David (...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sthitch
Ask the jack---I mean the nice people in Illinois who voted for him.
68 posted on 07/24/2005 5:30:11 PM PDT by GOPologist ("On some days you may feel like a dog; on other days you may feel like a hydrant!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: My2Cents

About 44 or 45 others.


69 posted on 07/24/2005 5:31:20 PM PDT by GOPologist ("On some days you may feel like a dog; on other days you may feel like a hydrant!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection

Tell that to Terri's husband.


70 posted on 07/24/2005 5:43:06 PM PDT by GOPologist ("On some days you may feel like a dog; on other days you may feel like a hydrant!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection

"The Senate's number two Democrat..."

More like "full of number two"...


71 posted on 07/24/2005 5:49:18 PM PDT by decal ("The French should stick to kisses, toast and fries.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Peach
So unless a nominee is pro choice, they aren't a credible nominee? Color me speechless.

One hundred and fifty years ago, Durbin would've called any SCOTUS nominee who didn't support slavery "not credible". He would've demanded they publicly support the Dred Scott decision as "settled law".

72 posted on 07/24/2005 6:05:10 PM PDT by okie01 (The Mainstream Media: IGNORANCE ON PARADE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: BJungNan

Russert doesn't get paid the big bucks for embarrassing or antagonizing liberal guests. He gets paid for dancing with them. Period.


73 posted on 07/24/2005 6:33:27 PM PDT by hinckley buzzard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Polybius
looking for meaning in chicken entrails,

They didn't need to. Instead they found "emanations" in the "penumbras" of existing rights.

Quite possibly, chicken guts would have been more reliable.

74 posted on 07/24/2005 6:39:03 PM PDT by hinckley buzzard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: hinckley buzzard
Russert doesn't get paid the big bucks for embarrassing or antagonizing liberal guests. He gets paid for dancing with them. Period.

That is no excuse for asking a direct question and then sitting quietly while the guest completely avoids the question. Russert looked like an idiot that did not know how to get a guest to answer his question.

75 posted on 07/24/2005 8:48:24 PM PDT by BJungNan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: hinckley buzzard
Russert doesn't get paid the big bucks for embarrassing or antagonizing liberal guests.

...and it has nothing to do with embarrassing or antagonizing a guest, liberal or otherwise. Viewers are not so stupid as to fall for that charade if that is what you mean.

76 posted on 07/24/2005 8:51:46 PM PDT by BJungNan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection
What is with these Illinois Senators these days? There has not been a worthy member of the Senate from that state since Everett Dirksen. On the other hand, I am from NJ and cannot remember a Senator worthy of praise in 50 years.
77 posted on 07/25/2005 8:05:32 AM PDT by wmileo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection

So much for Democrats celebrating "diversity".


78 posted on 07/25/2005 8:21:40 AM PDT by FeeinTennessee (http://hometown.aol.com/feereports/feepolitics.html)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

How would Mary Jo feel about this?


79 posted on 07/25/2005 8:36:19 AM PDT by Tumbleweed_Connection (I take the Ginsburg)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-79 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson