Kerry's Latest Basement Yelp

Monday, January 30, 2006

Writing in the Huffington Post today, John Kerry lectures America on the importance of obstructing well-qualified judicial appointments to the Supreme Court:

Many people seem curious or even skeptical why United States Senators believe it's so important to take a stand against the confirmation of Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court -- why we're willing to take on a fight that conventional wisdom suggests we will lose.

The reality is simple. We care about the future of our country. We care about the millions of Americans who expect Congress to stand up and fight for their rights and their freedoms, and we also know that the Supreme Court, again and again, is the battlefield on which those rights and freedoms are decided.

Wrong, pal. The battlefield on which rights and freedoms are decided is in Congress. The Court determines when Congress goes out of bounds, not the other way around.

So let's get this straight. The time to fight is now - before we make the irreversible decision of confirming a new Supreme Court Justice. When you're talking about the Supreme Court, you don't live to fight another day. It's a zero sum game. Once Judge Alito becomes Justice Alito, there's no turning back the Senate confirmation vote. We don't get to 'take a mulligan' when choosing a Supreme Court Justice. The direction our country takes for the next thirty years is being set now.

Now that's some serious passion. While it's good for the country that the confirmation process is coming to a close, I will sorely miss these pathetic rants against a superior judge who's been lambasted beyond belief simply because he's not a guaranteed supporter of the liberals' precious right to abortion.

Will it matter if we speak up after the Supreme Court has granted the executive the right to use torture, or to eavesdrop without warrants? Will it matter if we speak up only after a woman's right to privacy has been taken away? Will history record what we say after the courthouse door is slammed in the faces of women, minorities, the elderly, the disabled, and the poor? No. History will record what we say and what we do now.

I don't think President Senator Kerry is in much of a position to talk about the poor and minorities, both of which groups will get equal justice under the law before Alito; yes, even if it means they don't win their case which tends to happen at the appellate level after you've already been tried and convicted by a lower judge and jury.

What on earth are we waiting for? We all know why President Bush nominated Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court. He is packing the court with conservative ideologues who will extend the legacy of his presidency for years to come. After all, Judge Alito was nominated only after extreme members of the right-wing killed the nomination of Harriet Miers, an accomplished lawyer who ideologues fumed lacked a track record of proven, tested, activist conservatism. Those same individuals heralded Judge Alito's nomination.

No, Miers was bounced because she wasn't of the caliber both Roberts and Alito are. If track records were so important then conservatives would have said no to John Roberts. But yes, even "extreme members of the right-wing" wanted someone a little more qualified than Bush's personal attorney to sit on the Supreme Court.

Ann Coulter, who last week suggested Justice Stevens should be poisoned, who denounced the nomination of John Roberts, celebrated Judge Alito's nomination, stating that Bush gave Democrats 'a right-hook' - high praise from an activist who said that Republicans need to nominate a person who 'wake[s] up every morning . . . chortling about how much his latest opinion will tick off the left.'

No, Coulter joked Justice Stevens should be poisoned, but I know; only Jon Stewart is allowed to tell a joke. Coulter was serious however about Alito being a "right-hook" to Democrats. You see, it was Bush who was elected president, not Kerry. Bush has that privilege, as did Bill Clinton when he "packed" the Court with liberals Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer.

After reviewing Judge Alito's writings as a Department of Justice lawyer and a federal judge, I have no doubt why he is so heralded by the most extreme Republicans. There is no doubt about the kind of Justice Samuel Alito will be. He will make it harder for the most disadvantaged members of our society to have their day in court. He will allow the President's power to grow far beyond what the Framers of the Constitution intended. He will roll back women's privacy rights. Empty promises made in the heat of a highly-charged and exceedingly political confirmation battle cannot erase a twenty year record.

He's "heralded by the most extreme Republicans"...and the American Bar Association, and his colleagues on the federal bench, and the majority of Americans. I'd say that’s pretty good company.

No one will be able to say, in five to ten years, that they are surprised by the decisions Judge Alito makes from the bench. They know that in his fifteen years on the Third Circuit, Judge Alito has almost never voted in favor of African-American plaintiffs in employment discrimination cases. They know that he routinely defers to government invasions into personal privacy, often going out of his way to excuse unlawful government actions. And they know that the only statement he has ever made regarding a woman's right to privacy is that she does not have one.

Ah yes, the race card. Sorry President Senator Kerry, but there's no quota for African-American plaintiffs, but to even suggest Alito is racist proves what a disgrace the senator from Massachusetts is. As for privacy, we already know the biggest offenders are the liberals on the Court who ruled last year that your private property can be legally seized by another private individual. Liberals such as Kerry have no room to lecture Americans on privacy.

People who believe in privacy rights, who fight for the rights of the most disadvantaged, who believe in balancing the power between the President and Congress have no choice but to stand up against Judge Alito.

There he goes again on privacy. I guess people who believe in the right to produce harmful narcotics should oppose Alito, as well supporters of prostitution, child pornography and every other industry that thrives in the confines of one's privacy.

I know better than anyone that elections have consequences and that the President has every right to nominate whomever he chooses to replace Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. But I also know that Senators have the right - in fact, they have a constitutional responsibility, to question whether that nominee is the right choice. That is why the Framers required the Senate to provide advice and consent. We are not meant to be a rubber stamp. We need not rush to judgment simply to satisfy the political deadline of a State of the Union address.

I am convinced that Judge Alito is the wrong choice for America. In fact, I am convinced that he is a dangerous choice for America. This is a rare moment in Washington. We are facing the vote of a lifetime - a vote that will shape the law for generations to come. Despite the predictions of the pundits, the story is not over until the last vote is cast. We cannot win unless we try. The time to take a stand is now, to fight for the rights and freedoms of all Americans is when they're endangered not after they've been diminished. It is time to take a stand against Judge Alito, and take a stand for the kind of America we've been for over two hundred years.

Then vote no. That's how you express advice and consent. Obstructionism through a filibuster is called being a sore loser. Oh, but how great the State of the Union address will be tomorrow night, when Samuel Alito shows up in his black robe as the newest justice of the United States Supreme Court.