Kennedy defends Democrats blocking of Bush judicial nominations

MassLive ^ | 10/31/2003 | Associated Press

[PeteFromMontana]

The Associated Press 10/31/2003, 3:21 p.m. ET

BOSTON (AP) -- U.S. Sen. Edward M. Kennedy on Friday accused the Bush administration of packing the federal bench with right-wing ideologues and defended Senate Democrats' blocking of four of President Bush's nominations.

The Massachusetts Democrat's comments came a day after Mississippi judge Charles Pickering became the fourth of Bush's judicial nominees to be filibustered by Democrats.

Speaking to a gathering of students from five Boston-area law schools, Kennedy called the Senate's ability to block judicial nominations "one of the most important checks and balances in the Constitution."

"Many of President Bush's nominees have clear records of hostility to congressional power to enact legislation affecting the states; hostility to the right to privacy and the right to choose; hostility to the enforcement of civil rights," he said.

Democrats say Pickering, who was nominated for a post on the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans, supported segregation as a young man, and pushed anti-abortion and anti-voting rights views as a state lawmaker.

"In light of the blatant ideological selection of judicial nominees, how can our Republican colleagues expect the Senate to ignore the nominee's ideology?" Kennedy said.

Republicans say Pickering is the victim of stereotypes about southerners. But Kennedy said the GOP used similar tactics to sabotage several of President Clinton's nominees to the federal bench.

"When President Bush took office, the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals (in Cincinnati) was nearly half empty because Republicans had blocked Clinton's appointments to that court," he said. "Now, with the cooperation of the Bush administration, Republicans are attempting to fill as many of those vacancies as possible with nominees who share their ideology."

[PeteFromMontana]

It must be true, Uncle Teddy sez so

[Aetius]

The funny thing is that racial preferences, gay marriage, abortion on demand, and rights for illegal aliens are all things opposed by the majority of Americans and conservative judges, yet they are supported by the judges favored by Democrats. Actually its more accurate to say that Democratic judges will force all of those things on the public despite the public not wanting them.

That the media doens't bust them on this is a shame, but to be expected. That the GOP isn't out there loudly pointing this out is an indictment of their refusal to fight fire w/ fire.

[Saltmeat]

It is very interesting that Teddy Kennedy has the gall to mention anything that Mr. Pickering might have done when he was a young man. I don't recall that Mr. Pickering was ever involved in the death of a young woman, nor do I remember Mr. Pickering leaving the scene of the accident and running and hiding in a motel all night while he worried about his political future while the young woman was left to drown in his automobile while help was a few hundred yards away at a firehouse. Why don't we all remind Senator Kennedy of his youth! THis man is devoid of any morals. He has no sense of right and wrong. The people of Mass. deserve what they elect.

[WinOne4TheGipper]

Just a minute... There are nine justices on the US Supreme Court. Seven of them were appointed by Republicans. Two were appointed by Bill Clinton. Of the nine justices, three are considered firmly conservative (Scalia, Thomas, Rehnquist). Two are considered moderate (Kennedy and O'Connor). Four are considered liberal (Stephens, Breyer, Ginsgerg, Souter). Of the moderate to liberals, both moderates and two of the liberals were appointed by Republicans. Democrats appointed neither of the moderates and none of the conservatives.
Query: What happened to the bipartisanship of liberals?

[nothingnew]

I would really like to beat this lying, womanizing, fat, drunken, scumbag murderer so bad that he'd be begging me to put him in an Oldsmobile and drop it in the ocean with the doors welded shut.

FMCDH

[paguch]

Kennedy is a former Catholic who now opposes Catholic Church ideals at every turn. He now stops all Catholics from high court positions.
Did he change his stance with the Church after he killed that girl? Couuld his Catholic confessor have told him to confess?
It would be interesting to know when he totally turned his back on the Church. When did he turn to the Dark Side?

[bert]

would any of these judges put Teddy in jail for vehicular homicide?

[Humidston]

And let us not forget this is the very same serious legislator who was caught along with Chris Dodd, upstairs in a Georgetown restaurant, playing "sandwich" with a waitress wedged between them.

Ahhh, those pesky party animals!

[Intolerant in NJ]

"In light of the blatant ideological selection of judicial nominees, how can our Republican colleagues expect the Senate to ignore the nominee's ideology?" Kennedy said...really ironic - one of the nominees being blackballed is Attorney General Pryor (Arkansas?) who is Catholic and whose beliefs are too deeply held, according to Senator Schumer (I supppose Schumer's beliefs are shallow and that makes him able to be effective in the Senate) - but I remember the furor over John Kennedy's catholocism when he ran for president - accusations that he would be controlled by the Vatican and thus never would be able to function independently - JFK persuaded the country that that was a bunch of nonsense, and was elected (perhaps) - now his brother is leading the pack using the same tactics which almost kept him from the presidency - disgraceful........

[PISANO]

So let me get this straight. A nominee that loses an legitimate Senate vote 52-48 is comparable to a nominee being filabustered with a Senate VOTE NOT allowed. While both in the eyes of Teddy boy are considered BLOCKED!!

[freeangel]

Let's see how he feels about Republican obstruction should the dims ever regain the majority. Oh, that's right--it wouldn't bother him at all-they would go nuclear in a N.Y. minute.

[F16Fighter]

In the year 2525, if man is still alive, Dubya Bush may use the bully pulpit to help hammer through his judical nominees.

[witnesstothefall]

The absolute gall of this man! There is no constitutional check to "block" judicial nominations in the Senate. There is a constitutional VOTE, which subversive Democrats are obstructing. The traitor democrats won't allow a constitutionally mandated VOTE because they know they would lose if the constitution were followed.

F'ing commies lie about first principles of the constitution. Why is there no retaliation for these unconstitutional crimes?

[Dutch Boy]

Wouldn't it be ironic if the sheeple revolted against the dems and their obstruction. I'd love it if the senate was 61 seats for the GOP on the day after the 2004 election.

[basil]

Who was it who said "only the good die young.? He was sure right about ole Teddy-boy!

[NutCrackerBoy]

In light of the blatant ideological selection of judicial nominees, how can our Republican colleagues expect the Senate to ignore the nominee's ideology? -Senator Edward M. Kennedy

According to EMK, it is ideological to favor constructionist interpretation.

[F16Fighter]

"Wouldn't it be ironic if the sheeple revolted against the dems and their obstruction. I'd love it if the senate was 61 seats for the GOP on the day after the 2004 election."

Yeah, be great IF the voters had a clue -- and that's a big if.

Quite frankly, I can't be confident the GOP -- had they had that kind of overwhelming majority in the Senate -- would flex its political muscles. They already control the Presidency, Senate, AND House...

Am I cynic for good reason? ;-)

[F16Fighter]

"Why is there no retaliation for these unconstitutional crimes?"

It has to do with a spine. The GOP has none.

[eeriegeno]

Democrats say Pickering, who was nominated for a post on the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans, supported segregation as a young man

Teddy, Have ya ever heard of a fellow named Robert Byrd? Do ya have any idea what he may have done as a young man? I just can't believe what a bunch of GD hypocrites these democrats are????????