SETBACK FOR REPUBLICANS

The judicial filibuster fight in Washington is getting to be quite a spectacle. Moveon.org has pledged $700,000 for television commercials attacking any rule change that would prevent filibusters. One of the ads shows elephants trampling the congress. Now there's an interesting thought: If you allow an up-or-down vote on a judicial nomination that the equivalent of elephants trampling the congress.

There's a reason why this filibuster fight is so important to Democrats. For the last fifty years liberals have managed to enact more of their agenda through the courts than through legislative action. Where the left fails in legislative initiatives, they often succeed in the federal courts. Examples abound. In California the left opposes a ballot initiative that would withhold certain taxpayer-funded services to illegal aliens. The left loses, and the initiative passes. The liberals immediately rush to the courts to have the will of the people overturned.

The Democrats are filibustering appellate nominees because they know that for the foreseeable future they will need a liberal judiciary in order to have any chance at all in enacting even a portion of their agenda. Any appellate federal judge who believes in a strict construction of our Constitution is a threat to the leftist agenda, and most be stopped.

I know you've heard various stories on this, but never before in the history of this country has there been a Senate filibuster for a nominee to an appellate bench where that candidate had been approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee and where the candidate had the votes needed for confirmation on the Senate floor.

Ok .. having said all that, the Republicans had a bit of a setback in this particular battle yesterday. I'm referring to Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist's little satellite broadcast to churches across the nation. The telecast was billed as an event to denounce Democrats as "against people of faith." This "against people of faith" line is a nicer way of saying "anti-Christian."

That's the way things are in today's America. If you ever make any comment or suggest in any way that you don't think that it's a good idea for religious groups to attempt to use the law to promote their religious ideals you are "anti-Christian" and a "Christian basher."

Why do I call Frist's satellite broadcast a setback? Because that little stunt did nothing but reinforce the idea that Republicans are more than willing to serve the goals of fundamentalist Christian conservatives, that goal being to have their religious beliefs codified and made a part of our law. Americans saw that done in the Terri Schiavo matter, and made it very clear that they were less than pleased. Many Americans will view Frist's address to churches over the weekend as a sure signal that his fight against the filibuster is really nothing more than a fight to give conservative Christians control over the nation's judiciary.

A "Vent" in this morning's Atlanta Journal-Constitution expressed that very fear:

"Girls, get your burqas ready. If conservatives succeed in controlling the judiciary, then we really will be on our way to becoming a Taliban Christian nation."

The fight to end the filibusters in judicial nominations should be presented to Americans as a fight for our Constitution and a fight for the clear intent of our founding fathers --- that judicial nominees be approved by a majority vote of the Senators, not as a fight to bring religious ideals to the Congress.

You'll need a barf bag for this. Some recent history from the hypocritical democrat left (emphasis mine):

COVER STORY:
Democratic National Convention
July 30, 2004 Episode no. 748

BOB ABERNETHY, anchor: In his speech accepting the Democratic nomination for president this week, John Kerry directly addressed his faith -- something he has rarely done in the campaign so far. Kerry also said his campaign welcomes people of faith. In recent months, the Democratic Party has been accused of fostering a political "God gap" by letting Republicans lay sole claim to religious territory. Religion wasn't given a lot of prominence at this convention -- but it was there.

Kim Lawton has our special report on religious activities at the Democratic convention -- activities that went largely uncovered elsewhere

KIM LAWTON: From floor speeches to prayers and special events around the city, Democrats incorporated religion on several fronts this week. Many here told us they are tired of seeing Republicans portrayed as being more religious. Democratic strategists hope a focus on faith could help persuade undecided religious voters in key swing states.

Following long-standing tradition, every day's official proceedings began -- and ended -- with prayer. Among those leading the prayers were the Reverend Roberta Hestenes, an evangelical Presbyterian; Greek Orthodox Archbishop Demetrios; and Muslim Imam Yahya Hendi.

Imam YAHYA HENDI: A reading from the Holy Qur'an. O mankind, I, God, created you.

LAWTON: One of the nation's most prominent preachers, the Reverend James Forbes of Riverside Church in New York City, called for a new progressive agenda centered on faith.

Rev. FORBES: The truth is there are people within the Democratic Party who are as religious, in a deep sense, as any of the others around on the Right, or even in the center. So what is happening now is that people who are Democrats are free to articulate the reason for the policies that they propose. That's a new thing.

LAWTON: The week kicked off Sunday with a service at Paul Revere's historic Old North Church.

Reverend STEPHEN AYRES (Old North Church): Without this church, you might be assembling here to nominate Tony Blair instead of John Kerry.

LAWTON: After a specially written election litany was read, two lanterns were lit to welcome the delegates. They were displayed in the steeple of Old North all week long. Among those at the service was Linda Maloney, an Episcopal priest from St. Cloud, Minnesota, and a first-time Democratic delegate. She said she wore her priestly collar all week as a sign that her religious beliefs are compatible with the Democratic Party.

Reverend LINDA MALONEY (Minnesota Delegate): I think the party has been a little ambivalent because they've received so much attack from the Right that's religiously identified. So they're really heartened when they see somebody who absolutely identifies as religious and also as a Democrat.

LAWTON: Across town, a broad coalition of Jewish groups threw a reception to celebrate the long-standing relationship between Democrats and Jews.

JOSH BLOCK (AIPAC): The Democratic Party has always been there in support of the issues that matter to the Jewish community, and that includes a strong and abiding relationship with Israel, as well as a whole range of issues.

LAWTON: Senator Joe Lieberman said Democratic policies follow the biblical values that Jews espouse.

Senator JOSEPH LIEBERMAN (D-CT): Those principles of social justice and moral leadership have been, over the long term, best expressed in American politics by the Democratic Party of the United States of America.

LAWTON: Muslims, meanwhile, moved to forge their own relationship with the Democratic Party. In the last presidential election, leading Muslim groups urged their community to vote as a bloc for George Bush. But since then, many Muslims have become disillusioned. They feel unfairly targeted in post-9/11 security crackdowns. At least 40 Muslim delegates attended this convention, including Dr. Inayat Lalani from Texas.

Dr. INAYAT LALANI (Texas Delegate): We feel much more at home in the Democratic Party. It's the party of immigrants, party of minorities, party of underprivileged.

LAWTON: There were also discussions about how John Kerry's campaign has handled religion. During a panel sponsored by Wesley Theological Seminary, former Clinton Chief of Staff John Podesta said Kerry needs to speak more openly about his convictions.

JOHN PODESTA (Former Clinton Chief of Staff): He comes from a tradition which doesn't wear it on his sleeve quite as much as some other religious traditions in this country, but I think that he needs to speak, I think, with clarity, not just about the public policy choices but [about] the deep moral core from whence he makes those public policy choices.

LAWTON: The Kerry-Edwards campaign stepped up its outreach to religious constituents at a "People of Faith" luncheon. Prominent religious leaders from across the spectrum attended. Just last week, the Democratic National Committee hired a new political point person on religion: the Reverend Brenda Bartella Peterson of the Christian Church, Disciples of Christ.

Reverend BRENDA BARTELLA PETERSON (Senior Advisor for Religious Outreach, DNC): The very fact that I was just hired -- the first in a long time -- senior advisor for religious outreach is a strong statement that the Democrats and John Kerry and John Edwards want to reach out to religious voters, want to hear what they have to say.

LAWTON: The efforts are mainly aimed at political and theological liberals. Mainline Protestants and black church leaders were visible at many convention events, including an interfaith rally encouraging more political attention to issues of poverty and hunger. White evangelicals and Catholics had a much lower profile.

Former Boston Mayor Ray Flynn was President Clinton's ambassador to the Vatican. He says the Democrats' stand on abortion is still a key stumbling block for undecided religious voters.

RAY FLYNN (Former Vatican Ambassador): I don't think pro-life people like myself necessarily expect politicians, Democrat or Republican, to agree on what I believe. But, boy, oh boy, do I get upset, and do people get upset, when they think there's no room for them to express their point of view. Now, that Democratic convention in Boston, there was no room for dissenting voice or diversity on some of these issues. No room whatsoever.

LAWTON: Party leaders say more specific religious outreach plans will be developed in coming weeks.

Rev. PETERSON: We plan to go all over the nation. We plan to have a religious Web page on the DNC site and to let people of faith be heard. To let them know that their voice can say, "We think the federal budget is a moral document. We think that there are issues in this campaign that have a theological underpinning."

LAWTON: Linda Maloney says her convention experience renewed her enthusiasm to get out the vote for Democratic candidates.

Rev. MALONEY: The day after I get home, there's a door-knocking scheduled, so if I have the energy, I hope to go out, you know, with my credential and say, "I just got back from the Democratic convention. Let me talk to you about John Kerry and John Edwards."

LAWTON: Campaign officials are hopeful such momentum will translate into new religious votes come November.

ABERNETHY: Kim, back from Boston -- how extensive is this religious outreach effort? Does it really represent the heart of the Kerry campaign?

LAWTON: Well, I think the Kerry campaign is divided over these issues. A lot of people are urging them to have this stronger outreach to the religious community -- to talk about faith issues. But I'm told there are others in the campaign, at high levels, that are uncomfortable. They are worried about generating controversy, they are worried about creating problems. The candidate himself, John Kerry, is also a little uncomfortable addressing these issues.

ABERNETHY: Of course. So are we voters -- aren't we -- ambivalent about the place of religion and politics?

LAWTON: American voters, according to polls, want a president who is religious. But they are more divided about how religious, and how much religion should guide policies. So there is that ambivalence. Also, I think religious voters don't want to see their faith exploited for political purposes. So the tone of these efforts is going to be very important.

ABERNETHY: Kim, many thanks.

Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked: Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice ? And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.
It is substantially true that virtue or morality is a necessary spring of popular government. The rule, indeed, extends with more or less force to every species of free government. Who that is a sincere friend to it can look with indifference upon attempts to shake the foundation of the fabric? - Washington's Farewell Address (A. Hamilton, speechwriter)

The system of those who would "exclude religious principle" is to promote the conceit that anything beyond praying in your own closet is "an Establishment of religion." Not true. "An Establishment of religion" is a church funded by the national treasury, and/or with advantages given to those who attend it. Anything less than that is constitutional, as this author should know. And to propose that no religious symbol ever be placed on government property is to propose the removal of all religios symbols in military cemetaries. It is nothing less than a project to destroy the national memory.

There is however an actual Establishment based on the favor of the government and having political and religious implications. Broadcasting as we know it could not exist without the censorship of all but the few whom the government favors with licenses. And broadcasting - especially broadcast journalism, which the government promotes - contains the planted axiom that what is unusual and novel is what is important.

And the Bible - and church tradition - is neither unusual nor novel - it is the most common book in the country and it doesn't change.

Why Broadcast Journalism is
Unnecessary and Illegitimate

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.