Skip to comments.Operation Obstruct Justice
Posted on 10/25/2001 6:59:44 AM PDT by DoctorMichaelEdited on 07/12/2004 3:48:12 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
Operation obstruct justice by Thomas L. Jipping With just a few weeks remaining until the Senate adjourns for the year, Democrats are trying to deflect criticism from their confirmation obstruction campaign against President Bush's judicial nominees with a series of false, and sometimes bizarre, claims. Let's clear away a little of the smoke.
(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...
Wheres the BIPARTISANSHIP in this?
Is there anything WE can do?
People are using the word 'dangerous', and 'terrorism', to further every 'political agenda' nowadays.
We must start NOW. We have all heard that the pen or keyboard these days, is mighter then the sword.
Well "Let's Roll" and jump on these faltering pliticos no matter what party they come from and tell them to SHUT-UP about our image to the world. Tell them that if they don't stop questioning our response to the attacks, they will answer for it at the polls.
I say that ALL FReepers whose district is represented by the likes of bin Biden and all similar "bin" liberals call/email/fax them and call them out. I firmly believe that if WE let people like Biden spread his views, President Bush will have even more of a struggle during this war.
If the Demo-rats controlling the Judiciary Committee get their way we'll have LIBERAL judges, as in the case of Mousaui (sp?), saying investigators can't have a wire-tap OR permission to take a peekey at the contents of a suspicious 'swarthy' male's computer's hard drive.........unless you'd prefer them to run the clock out on this OR have the Dems pursue THEIR political agenda.
I agree that we can't become complacent about the House, though, and the Senate will need some work in the 2002 election so that the President's nominees can't be obstructed. My wife and I are turning over our income tax refund to the RNC.
Some informed people already know that the Bankrupcty Judges are being changed because the banks that spent over 80 million lobbying for changing debt forgiveness for ordinary Americans that lose their jobs, or business, etc., were not successful with the legislation they drafted, so now they are attacking the courts, trying to load the courts with Pro-Banking, Anti-Consumer Judges.
Meanwhile, no SEC enforcement for Corporations that have cleaned investors out, while merrily robbing corporate coffers of liquidity.
I disagree with this arguement........it is a canard.
As you may well know this whole series of constitutionally mandated steps is fraught with politics.
The Democrats first attempted to further THEIR political agenda with the BORKING of Robert Bork. They next proceeded to further their political agenda with the high-tech LYNCHING of Clarence Thomas. They have consistently attempted to stack the courts with liberal judges who are more 'sensitive' to groups like the ACLU and other neer-do-wells who are slowly chipping away at our freedoms. This process, in-and-of-itself, IS political.
The President (who is trying to govern during a crisis) has submitted his nominations for Judiciary Appointments and the Democrats are choosing to ignore his picks. I would feel much better with Dubya's nominations than those of the Democrats who would prefer that, in the interest of multi-culturalism and illegal immigrants' rights (?), that we not check out any and all leads in the current crisis.
If there is any 'error' on the side of a poltical agenda I would prefer it to be on the side of Dubya.
Bush also supports allowing mexican trucks, stocked with drivers that notoriously disobey safety regulations, to begin traversing our highways, unchecked, and unencumbered, all in the name of 'Free trade', and cheaper transportation costs.
Does this concern you? No, not yet, not until someone you know, is wiped out on the highway because one of these trucks has faulty brakes, or a mexican driver that has been awake for too many hours, then we will all care about these 'for-profit-only' decisions.
The tragedy of 09-11-01, does not make 'Dubya' a God-Like leader, and I notice His solution to this is to grow the Government, not shrink it down.
I still have yet to see any difference between the 2 parties.
It is for the President to "Constitutionally" propose his nominees........this step cannot be done by Congress.
It is for the Congress to "Constitutionally" either accept or decline his nominees........this step cannot be done by President. (except for Bill Clinton, of course)
I never claimed Dubya to be "God-like". What I HAVE claimed by mentioning this article is that he is doing HIS business and the Demo-rats are NOT doing theirs.......W HAS 'Nominated"........they are neither accepting or declining his nominations but instead are choosing to do nothing.......making it harder for W to govern.
........and I notice His solution to this is to grow the Government, not shrink it down.
I agree........the first thing he should have done is defund alot of leftist mouthpieces like PBS and NPR so as to cut down on Gubmint. The list is endless.
I still have yet to see any difference between the 2 parties.
Judging Leahy: The stall on Bushs judicial nominees.
October 17, 2001 9:00 a.m. On Tuesday morning, a handful of reporters made their way past the scene-of-the-crime tape closing off sections of the Hart Senate Office Building's first floor to meet with Sen. Orrin Hatch about what would be the biggest fight in town, if not for the high-stakes battle going on elsewhere. The statistics Sen. Hatch shared about judicial confirmations make a convincing case that Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy is engaging in an unprecedented stall that Hatch cites as responsible for "an astronomical vacancy rate on the federal bench."
If it weren't for his "that was then" partisan flexibility, Majority Leader Tom Daschle, who is assisting with the stall, would be agreeing with Hatch. Last year, when there were 76 vacancies on the federal bench, Daschle complained that the federal courts were unable to do their crucial work. The Leahy blockade has left 108 judicial vacancies.
Under both Democratic and Republican Senates, with a single exception (a Clinton nominee judged "not qualified" by the ABA), the judicial nominees of President Bush's predecessors, when nominated before Labor Day, all were confirmed by the end of that year. Under Chairman Leahy, only eight of President Bush's 44 judicial nominees have made it to the Senate floor for approval. So, in contrast with his predecessors, whose judicial nominations enjoyed confirmation rates ranging from 93 percent to 100 percent, President Bush currently has an 18 percent approval rate for his nominees.
If the president weren't otherwise fully engaged, Sen. Leahy would likely be called on to explain why he is blocking nominees who have earned the highest ratings from his pet ABA, and who enjoy bipartisan support from their home-state senators. Leahy's weak hand was revealed when every Republican senator was willing to block approval of the foreign-operations appropriations bill to protest his indefensible stall.
A city as sensitive to whether politicians are exploiting America's war on terrorism to advance partisan goals as it is to white powdery substances, should be making a simple request of Sen. Leahy just treat President Bush's judicial nominees like your Republican predecessor treated President Clinton's.
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.