|
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
Reid, Leahy Try to Sway Bush's Court Decision
Senate Democrats are trying, once again, to "reach out” and help President Bush with his next selection to the U.S. Supreme Court. As with White House counsel Harriet Miers – a trusted Bush confidante who withdrew her nomination Thursday – Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) hopes to sway the president toward a "consensus nominee.” Reid reportedly recommended Miers as a Supreme Court nominee before the president made his announcement Oct. 3. Soon afterward – in a surprise to many – conservative Republicans blasted the selection, which led, in part, to her withdrawal notice. Well, once again, Democrats are trying to have their say and their way regarding a Supreme Court appointment. Reid and Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), a Senate Judiciary Committee member, penned a letter to the president Friday where they strongly urged him "to refrain from nominating to the Supreme Court any of the handful of judicial nominees who were filibustered during the past four years, or any other similarly divisive candidate.”
Story Continues Below Someone needs to remind these Democrats that they are the minority party. Reid and Leahy continued (emphasis added): "We regret that Ms. Miers was not even afforded the opportunity to answer her right wing critics at a Judiciary Committee hearing … we urge you to pick one of the many qualified mainstream women and minority candidates who can win widespread bipartisan support in the Senate and among the American people.” Note the Democrat buzzwords in that comment – mainstream, women and minority. So, according to Reid and Leahy, respected judges, such as Michael McConnell and Michael Luttig – both of whom are white males and who are rumored to be on nearly every conservative's "short list” – should not be considered for nomination. They are being pre-emptively "Borked” on the basis of gender and skin color. Sounds fair, doesn’t it? Do the Democrats actually think they have a voice in this process? Fat chance. Look what happened with Miers. Again, according to their letter, Reid and Leahy seem to have provided the criteria for selecting Justice Janice Rogers Brown – a black woman – but, alas, she is considered a libertarian-conservative judge, and received a rocky reception the last time she stood before the Senate Judiciary Committee. Seems like she would be the ideal candidate to select, just to make things interesting. If, however, Bush actually considers the Reid-Leahy request, he should read several times this phrase contained within their letter: " … Justice Sandra Day O’Connor [should] be replaced by a mainstream nominee, not by an activist who would bring an ideological agenda to the Court.” Someone in the "mild and moderate” mold of Ruth Bader Ginsburg, perhaps? Get serious. The Democrats actually believe they are "entitled” to the associate justice position being vacated by O’Connor, whom they swore was a conservative many times during her more than two decades on the High Court. Now, they value O’Connor as an "important” swing vote that the court needs, not an "ideologue,” such as those judges favored by the "right wing” of the president’s Republican Party. Well, there is no entitlement to be had by any political party, save for the privilege afforded to the president who is in a position to nominate a judge to the Supreme Court. By this measure, and in light of the Reid-Leahy letter, Bush should remember that any selection that will upset liberal Democrats will likely serve the U.S. Supreme Court, the Constitution - and his conservative Republican base – quite well. Merit and excellence should lead the selection process, not quotas. Thanks for the letter, Senators. Unlike Harriet Miers, it’s a keeper. Editor's note:
Inside Cover Stories
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Print Page 
Forward Page 
|
| All Rights Reserved © 2012 NewsMax.Com |