Did someone say 'flip-flops'?
Posted on 09/21/2005 9:38:43 AM PDT by West Coast Conservative
I will vote against the nomination of John Roberts to serve as Chief Justice of the United States. I refuse to vote for a Supreme Court nominee who came before the Senate intent on demonstrating his ability to deftly deflect legitimate questions about his views, opinions and philosophy.
If he is confirmed – and he may well be – the Roberts Court will shape the course of constitutional law for decades to come. It will decide dozens of cases that will define the depth and breadth of freedom in America – our commitment to civil rights, our dedication to civil liberties, our devotion to privacy and a woman's right to choose.
With that much at stake, Judge Roberts needed to show us where his heart is. Instead he recited case law and said little about what he really thought.
While I recognize that other members of the Senate will legitimately make a different choice, I will vote “NO” on the Roberts nomination.
(Excerpt) Read more at johnkerry.com ...
This is news? The real news was that Leaky Leahy is going to vote FOR him..</sarcasm
Ted Kennedy wears lipstick??????
CSPAN certainly should...... Don't know the time and I don't know if each of the committee members gets one last chance to pontificate before voting. I hope no Pubbie pulls a 'Voinovich' as happened with Bolton.
Is that John “The Vietman Hero Reporting for Duty” Kerry????
He should have paid more attention to what happened to Al Gore. Somebody better break the news to him gently.
I am SHOCKED, shocked I tell you...
Maybe if Judge Roberts had thrown someone's robes and gavel over a fence somewhere, ahh well, we will never know.....
YES.
headline should read will show up and vote, theres the news
Ruth Bader Ginsburg never had to demonstrate whether or not she could deftly deflect legitimate questions because none were ever asked. Only happy, fluffy questions from her mutual admiration society. And her refusal to answer certain questions was quickly dismissed as her right to privacy. Her own private opinions would never, we were assured, interfere with her application of the law.
As for Kerry, he deftly assumed deflection whether or not it existed, because he never answers a legitimate, direct question, ever. And never with a direct answer, just a rambling, twisting vine of meaningless drivel.
And unlike Kerry, Roberts 'views, opinions and philosophy' may never interfere with his application of law and rules to cases put before him.
Time to crap or get off the pot, Senator Kerry
Beldar notes that it's getting very, very close to the deadline for John Kerry to file a libel lawsuit against the people behind the Swift Boat Veterans For Truth for their book, "Unfit To Serve." After all, since a lot of people attribute at least part of the blame for Kerry's loss on their efforts, and Kerry and others say that their charges are "false" and "disproven," wouldn't it behoove the Senator to get it on the record that they lied to him? Hell, he could even cite his loss to Bush under damages.
I have to disagree with Beldar, though, about saying that Kerry is just letting this slip by, hoping it quietly fades away. After, Kerry's home state of Massachusetts has a three-year statute of limitations, giving him until 2007 to file his lawsuit. And judging by his own ongoing reluctance to release his full military service records, despite repeated promises to do so (including one on the air to Tim Russert several months ago), I think it's safe to say that among all his other flaws, Kerry is a world-class procrastinator.
Pity, though. Kerry was at least good for entertainment. And it'd be a refreshing change to have him actually have to "put up or shut up," instead of simply repeating over and over that something was "false" without ever actually having to show otherwise.
By: Jay Tea, http://wizbangblog.com/
Did someone say 'flip-flops'?
Pot, meet kettle.
Hey, did anyone hear that Kerry was a Vietnam veteran?
The 14th amendment:
Section 3.
No person shall be a Senator
or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States,
shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof.
Sign the Form 180 or STFU traitor.
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.