Posted on 07/13/2005 5:39:26 AM PDT by ConservativeMan55
This is a transcript of Senator Coburn's remarks on Fox and Friends. Doocy:
Doocy:
Good Morning Senator. Its a pleasure to have you here.
Coburn:
Its a pleasure to be here Steve.
Doocy:
Ok we brought you on here to discuss the Supreme Court situation. What do you think?
Coburn:
I believe its the Presidents prerogative. You know its like one of my Democrat colleages in the House said. If you want to nominate judges to the Supreme Court you need to win the Presidency.
The demand for input is just that. Its a demand. There is nothing constitutional about it. Its the Presidents decision. He's being very gracious to reach across the isle and to talk with almost every Senator about their thoughts on the Supreme Court Nomination.
But when you get down to it, the decision is his and his alone. He will decide who to pick, and then its our job in the Senate to decide if that person should have a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court.
ED:
When Bill Clinton made a nomination he actually brought Orin Hatch in and talked with him about it, and said what do you think. And Hatch would say you're gonna have problems with that one. There is a background of this happening isn't there?
Coburn:
But there's nothing that requires that precedent for this president. Again if you look at the constitution its his option. I don't believe he has to say here somebody I'm thinking about what do you think?
What he's doing is he's talking to everybody and getting their thoughts. Being from Oklahoma. I think all the hype on the nomination...I'm not sure that doesn't hurt the process rather than help the process.
Doocy:
Plus Senator the atmosphere down in Washington is so bitter right now. Folks across the country are hoping there's not just a big bloody fight over whoever it is.
Coburn:
Well you know if you bring it back to what should be the characteristics of a Supreme Court nominee. Number one the person should have a stellar personal history. Both in terms of their ethical behavior. And jurisprudence behavior.
Number two is they should in my mind understand that the constitution is the law that we depend on. Not foreign or international law. Which is a disturbing trend of the supreme court as of late. Also its not the job of the Supreme Court to make new laws. Its their job to interpret the old law.
Senator Coburn from Washington thank you for joining us.
Coburn:
Thank you Steve and God Bless.
"He's changed his hair a lot I have noticed."
I though perhaps he was having his hair cut in the congressional barber shop, where congressmen used to get 75¢ haircuts (I don’t know if that’s still the subsidized price or not).
Seriously, he’s one of the few real conservatives in the Senate (as opposed to most of the checked-pants republicans who like to claim that title). I hope he aspires to higher office.
I'll bump to that!!
That would be like...a dream come true...
Ugh
bttt
Some of these plans come true, others don't. But the general direction of dismantling borders and removing control from localities has been uniform.
Tancredo looks better and better every day.
Indeed, it is the "supreme law of the land."
The various criteria which Senators Schumer, Reid, Leahy and other Democrats are laying out as those desirable for a Supreme Court Justice nominee, however, are ridiculous on their face and not worthy of consideration for those who would be interpreting "the law we depend on".
They say a new justice should be someone who can "bring us together"; should be someone with a "big heart"; should be able to "unite us"--not a word about someone who has studied the Founders' formula for preserving liberty, or as someone who has a deep understanding of the principles underlying our freedom.
Here is my post on another thread on this subject:
The President of the United States would do well to use his time reviewing the writings of America's Founders, its first few Presidents, and THE FEDERALIST, the series of 85 essays published in NY newspapers and written by James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and John Jay as expositions of the meaning and intent of the Constitution. A two-volume edition was published in 1788 for use in the ratification process in the other states.
According to Thomas Jefferson's record of an 1825 meeting of the Board of Visitors of the University of Virginia, the Board directed use of the 85 essays as the text for its law school in studies of "the general principles of liberty and the rights of man."
Jefferson's minutes stated, "The Federalist constitute an authority to which appeal is habitually made by all, and rarely declined or denied by any as evidencee of the general opinion of those who framed, and of those who accepted the Constitution of the U. S., on questions as to its genuine meaning."
For many decades, they were used as the basis for study in schools across America as a means of enlightening the minds of citizens on their Constitution.
America's ideas of liberty are under attack from without, and worse, from within, by those who would deny the Constitution's basis in the philosophy of the Declaration of Independence--Creator-endowed life, liberty, and rights, the foundation that distinguished it from all other constitutions that had ever been written.
Whether or not the ideas survive for posterity may well rest on the momentous decisions this President is about to make.
He does not need to consult his base, nor does he need to consult and compromise with the Left. He does need to consult the words and actions of his noble predecessors, Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Madison, Jay, and others who devised a formula for liberty which is unique in the world. Like them, President George W. Bush will be judged by future generations by his willingness to sacrifice all for the cause of liberty!
bump to that!
I wonder who his Democrat colleage in the House is. Sounds more like a Conservative/Republican.
He may have been referring back to 1998 or something.
In fact..since he used to be in the House right around 1998..and he referred to them as colleages...I'm almost sure thats what he meant.
What doctor would you send your family or spouse to?
Dr. Dean or Dr. Coburn?
Hahahahahahaha!
No contest!!!!
You know who I'd send em to!
As late Francis Schaeffer would say:
How should we then live?
Presdent Bush, as well as ourselves, should "leave it all on the field" for liberty's sake!
That's almost Traficant-esque...
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.