Posted on 07/07/2005 6:31:52 PM PDT by ovrtaxt
With Carl Limbacher and NewsMax.com Staff
|
|
|
|
|
For the story behind the story...
|
Thursday, July 7, 2005 2:34 p.m. EDT
Novak: Bush's Gonzales Support Frightening
Charging that President Bush may be an obstacle to appointing a conservative Supreme Court justice, columnist Robert Novak chastised the president for his remarks defending Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.
Novak fears Bush's remarks will be seen as a signal that the president intends to name him to fill the vacated seat of Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.
Noting that Sen. Kennedy has managed to establish in the media's warped minds a new standard for "mainstream conservatism" by citing the liberal O'Connor as a genuine conservative, Novak wrote that by contrast, the president "has put forth 'friendship' as a qualification for being named to the high court."
According to Novak, Both Kennedy's and Bush's statements left conservative Republicans, who he recalls have spent more than a decade planning for this moment to change the balance of power on the Supreme Court, reeling from blows delivered by two dissimilar political leaders.
As a result, Novak wrote, it's not Kennedy who is the bigger obstacle to a conservative court, but the president himself.
"While Kennedy's ploy presents a temporary problem, Bush's stance could be fatal," according to Novak. "The Right's morale was devastated by the president's comments in a USA Today telephone interview published on the newspaper's front page Tuesday: 'Al Gonzales is a great friend of mine. When a friend gets attacked, I don't like it.'"
To Novak's politically sensitive ears, that sounded as if Bush, whom he called a stubborn man, might go ahead and nominate Gonzales "in the face of deep and broad opposition from the president's own political base."
Added to the mix is the strong probability that ailing Chief Justice William Rehnquist is on the verge of announcing his retirement.
Such a scenario may give Bush the idea he has political cover to appoint Gonzalez.
As Novak puts it, Bush could "name one justice no less conservative than Rehnquist, and name Gonzales, whose past record suggests he would replicate retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor on abortion and possibly other social issues."
If Bush would do this, Novak says, it would be a massive defeat for conservatives because "the present ideological orientation of the court would be unchanged, which would suit the Left just fine."
Novak also noted that O'Connor was not considered a conservative when she was nominated 24 years ago, and writes that "the worst fears about her were realized by her consistently liberal positions on social issues. With Democrats now setting a new standard for conservatism, Republican senators could only bite their lips and praise her."
Novak conceded that Gonzales "would not exactly be another O'Connor, but he is still considered a disaster by Republican conservatives."
"Gonzales trial balloons were shot down on the right, but that has not stopped leaks from the White House." If a Rehnquist vacancy now is thrown into the mix, Novak asked, would Bush be tempted to temporize by naming one conservative and one non-conservative?
"Consequently, Bush's USA Today interview has been a source of intense anxiety on the right. Typically, the president did not defend Gonzales on his merits but with outrage that anybody would dare criticize his friend. That reflects a general schoolboy attitude that is losing the president support from fellow Republicans and conservatives."
I was told by a Mexican in the know that La Raza is a communist group.
No, you're the one who's lying. Gonzales's La Raza connections have been well documented on this forum.
Mark my words folks, there is STRATEGERY goin on here...
Jessie Jackson on Hannity and Colmes. He says we need a hispanic on the court.
Thanks for posting the facts about La Raza and other things on Gonzales -- facts are in short supply on here recently!
IS he a member? I'd like to see any links. I am not a fan of Gonzalez's, and I lean against his being nominated, but I'd like to know more.
I hope you're right, but Bush needs to quit being so defensive. It isn't our fault he has a radical friend.
Conservatives are savvy enough to know that they can't risk letting a "Gonzales trial balloon" float without being shot down. To say nothing would be a tacit endorsement of a unsatisfactory nominee. Nothing personal, Mr. President.
He was elected President, not Friend of Alberto Gonzales. He needs to behave as the President he campaigned to be, naming justices like Scalia and Thomas, and leading the war to kill the Islamic Terrorists who threaten our civilization.
I'm hispanic. La Raza is a Marxist organization.
Gonzalez has no business being even loosely associated or connected with those people, if he's a good American.
"Alberto Gonzales served with distinction on the board of directors of one of NCLR’s oldest and most respected affiliates, the Association for the Advancement of Mexican Americans in Houston, Texas," she said. "Moreover, during his tenure as White House counsel, he has been one of the most accessible members of the White House staff to NCLR and other Hispanic organizations."
So technically, he may not have been a La Raza member outright. I don't know how close of an affiliation the the AAMA has with La Raza. Clearly La Raza thinks of him as an ally.
Personally, the La Raza connection isn't the big issue with me. My big issue is that I want a Supreme Court pick that is in the image of Thomas and/or Scalia, you know, like Bush promised us. Gonzales is not in that image.
agreed, Novak seems to hate W, just like he hated the first President Bush.
Novak is a country club, capitalist RINO. He does not care for the social conservative wing in the Pub party.
Gonzales is not, nor has he been a member of La Raza. He was at one time on the board of a group called the Association for the Advancement of Mexican Americans (AAMA) an affiliate of La Raza.
Guilt by association is a common leftist tactic - has it been passed off to some conservative immigration watchdogs?
Found this on a web search on Gonzales -- also found out that a lot of leftist organizations opposed him as Attorney General for being too conservative.
I agree. If President Bush wants to insulate his friends from criticism he should leave them in the private sector. Gonzalez is the Attorney General and there have been almost five years worth of trial balloons suggesting he would be considered for the Supreme Court. We have every right to discuss his qualifications and criticize him as appropriate (or as we see fit).
And the distinction is? An affiliate is a branch organization. You're just playing a name game.
Thank you for clarifying that. I had forgotten the exact nature of the relationship.
By the way, anyone who would be a part of the Association for the Advancement of Mexican Americans can't possibly claim to have a clear view of conservatism.
Hopefully, Bush will nominate a member of the 'Association for the Advancement of America', and not some racist group.
I don't disbelieve you. How someone could belong to an organization like that and call themselves "conservative" or "republican" is beyond me. But, I don't trust him at all.
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.