Poor Judgement (LA Times Editorial Gets it Right)

Los Angeles Times ^ | September 30, 2005 | The Editors

[RWR8189]

THE GOOD NEWS IS THAT 22 Democratic senators voted to confirm John G. Roberts Jr. as the 17th chief justice of the United States. That's more than anyone would have imagined just a few months ago, when the talk in Washington was all about filibusters and nuclear options. The bad news is that 22 Democratic senators voted against Roberts. That's far more than the handful of Republicans who voted against Bill Clinton's two Supreme Court appointees, Stephen G. Breyer and Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

Washington's recent polarization suggests things could have been worse. But it is still alarming that 22 Democrats voted against a nominee of Roberts' caliber. Last November, the American people granted President Bush the power to appoint Supreme Court justices, and in his first opportunity to exercise this power he has acted responsibly, choosing a mainstream conservative with unimpeachable credentials. Half the Democrats in the Senate — including such independent-minded liberals as Patrick J. Leahy of Vermont and Russell D. Feingold of Wisconsin, both members of the Judiciary Committee — did the right thing by supporting the president's choice.

But too many Democrats beholden to liberal interest groups embarrassed themselves and the party by opposing Roberts. These groups wield disproportionate power in mobilizing activists and raising campaign funds, but they do not speak for the majority of Americans or even most Democrats.

Worse, in terms of the broader national interest, by appearing so obstructionist, these senators have undermined their credibility to oppose future judicial picks who may actually be outside the mainstream.

It was almost comical watching the likes of Harry Reid, the ostensibly centrist Senate minority leader from Nevada, and Charles E. Schumer of

[foreshadowed at waco]

Good find...didn't the LA Times recently get an overhaul?

[rom]

Wow. Never thought the LA Times would move (even so slightly) to the center!

Maybe their bottom line ($$$) is starting to effect them.
Not that I'll be subscribing anytime soon anyway.

[dirtboy]

didn't the LA Times recently get an overhaul

Apparently with a D-9 Cat...

[Southack]

It's almost frightening to see media Democrats acting smart for a change instead of blindly lashing out in radical hate.

Probably just an aberration, however.

[connectthedots]

Alright; who hacked the LA Times web site?

[RWR8189]

I don't know, but they've been on the right side of several issues lately.

Back in May they were gung-ho supporting the constitutional option as well.

[Wiseghy]

I suspect the Times fears for Dem. credibility if the party is "highjacked" by radical special interest groups that fall far out the mainstream of America.

C. Krauhthammer (sp?) also spoke about national Dem candidates being "forced" to vote this way last night on Fox.

[Political Junkie Too]

They recently canned Michael Kinsley.

-PJ

[GVnana]

Yeah. I think Krauthammer's take on this is correct. It's the Dems who are candidates who voted against Robert's confirmation. That way, they can't be held accountable if he makes a decision that offends their lefty base.

Never thought I'd say this, but Patrick Leahy actually showed some principle in voting for Roberts.

[Onelifetogive]

But too many Democrats beholden to liberal interest groups embarrassed themselves and the party by opposing Roberts.

Wouldn't that require them to have some shame?

[goldstategop]

I'm surprised the Los Angeles Times criticized the Democrats. But it underscores how beholden the Democrats are to the kook fringe that's now the party's mainstream. The truth of matter is no conservative is going to be acceptable to the Democrats and unless Bush caves in, he is going to face a huge fight on his hands with his next nominee. For the Left, there would be a fight since their control over the courts is at stake and they have no real agenda to bring the country together.

(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)

[goldstategop]

Liberals have no shame. More to the point, the Democrats have to discredit conservatives on personal grounds since they can't win in the arena of ideas. And they don't have the guts to be who they really are.

(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)

[goldstategop]

Virtually all the Democrats who voted against Roberts needed to reassure the kook base they heard them. These people are just outta the mainstream. I'm fed up with linguini-spined liberals lecturing to us about the mainstream!

(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)

[GVnana]

the kook base

That IS their mainstream. Or should I say, "mainstay"?