Skip to comments.
Durbin: Pro-Life Stance Would 'Disqualify' Roberts
NewsMax ^
| 7/24/05
| Limbacher
Posted on 07/24/2005 10:06:46 AM PDT by Tumbleweed_Connection
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-79 next last
To: Tumbleweed_Connection
I wish the MSM would challenge the assumption that Roe V Wade has anything to do with privacy. Many bright scholars have tried...none have succeeded.
2
posted on
07/24/2005 10:09:32 AM PDT
by
Fenris6
(3 Purple Hearts in 4 months w/o missing a day of work? He's either John Rambo or a Fraud)
To: Tumbleweed_Connection
The Left always talks "rights," but they never tell us how they're justified. And the fact that the rights of the Enlightenment were negative rights, based upon the nearly universal human passion to flee death, seems not to bother them one whit.
But positive rights are not negative rights. And there is no such thing as a natural right based on gender or human biology.
To: Tumbleweed_Connection
I just watched Durbin on Tim Russert's show. Russert let him off the hook on a question related to Roberts confirmation hearing.
Russert played a clip of Clinton as president saying he would appoint a Supreme Court nominee that believed in the right to choose.
Russert then asked, why is it okay for a democrat president to follow his philosophy on appointments but a Republican president can not.
Durbin never answered the question (just gave typical politician non answer). Russert let him ramble on and never came back to the question.
I kept thinking, where is Bill O'Reilly. He would would have told Durbin to stop right there and answer the question. Russert let Durbin spin on and on and on.
A real yelling at the TV moment and a reminder of why I rarely watch Russert. If he can not follow up on his own tough questions in his own show, then why do I need to watch.
4
posted on
07/24/2005 10:12:21 AM PDT
by
BJungNan
To: Tumbleweed_Connection
Unbelievable. Just unbelievable.
So unless a nominee is pro choice, they aren't a credible nominee? Color me speechless.
5
posted on
07/24/2005 10:12:54 AM PDT
by
Peach
To: Tumbleweed_Connection
From the left's viewpoint: "Diversity" means agreeing with their opinion.
6
posted on
07/24/2005 10:13:03 AM PDT
by
BenLurkin
(O beautiful for patriot dream - that sees beyond the years)
To: Tumbleweed_Connection
Durbin's like a dog that just can't stop itself from rolling in sh!t....
7
posted on
07/24/2005 10:15:07 AM PDT
by
freebilly
(Go Manitowoc Bandits!)
To: Tumbleweed_Connection
"Catholic" Durbin and Kennedy: "Catholics need not apply".
8
posted on
07/24/2005 10:15:19 AM PDT
by
Lawgvr1955
(Never draw to an inside straight.)
To: Tumbleweed_Connection
Pro terrorism should bar Turbin from the Senate!
9
posted on
07/24/2005 10:16:15 AM PDT
by
Paleo Conservative
(Hey! Hey! Ho! Ho! Andrew Heyward's got to go!)
To: Tumbleweed_Connection
The Senate's number two Democrat said Sunday that if Judge John Roberts doesn't recognize that the Constitution's right to privacy covers the Roe vs Wade abortion decision, it would "disqualify" him from serving on the Supreme Court. After arguing against litmus tests for court appointments for decades, the Dems have thrown all that out the window. I suppose there are not to be 'litmus tests' only when Dems make the appointments.
To: Tumbleweed_Connection
Did Russert ask Durbin if growing your own pot and smoking it violated your right to privacy? That behavior is illegal.
What about the guy who died screwing a horse? Are beastality laws a violation of the right to privacy?
What about prostitution? Or how about suicide, last I heard it was still a felony in some States.
11
posted on
07/24/2005 10:18:22 AM PDT
by
rollo tomasi
(Working hard to pay for deadbeats and corrupt politicians)
To: Tumbleweed_Connection
ANITA HILL CALL YOUR OFFICE! I wonder how "outraged" the 'RATS would become if Roberts compared abortion clinics to Nazi death camps and Soviet gulags for infants. "Planned Parenthood" as Pol Pot? Cool.
12
posted on
07/24/2005 10:18:39 AM PDT
by
FlingWingFlyer
(We did not lose in Vietnam. We left.)
To: Tumbleweed_Connection
Dick, you don't know dick. You LOST the election....OK.
Get a life and get out of the way. You are a putz little politico from Illinois, you mean nothing in the scheme of things. Sit down and STFU! We won the election and we mean to change legislation from the bench, and we will do exactly that. Dick, we believe in government for the people and by the people, not by a bunch of elitists. Sit on your opinions for all I care. The People have spoken!
13
posted on
07/24/2005 10:19:18 AM PDT
by
timydnuc
(I'll die on my feet before I'll live on my knees.)
To: Tumbleweed_Connection
Durbin: Only baby killers who will write baby killing into the U.S. Constitution are qualified to be on the U.S. Supreme Court.
Liberalism is a mental disorder.
14
posted on
07/24/2005 10:21:05 AM PDT
by
tomahawk
(Proud to be an enemy of Islam (check out www.prophetofdoom.net))
To: Tumbleweed_Connection
Durbin: Pro-Life Stance Would 'Disqualify' Roberts
*****
Darn ............. that Durbin's Mom didn't............ oh, never mind.
15
posted on
07/24/2005 10:26:01 AM PDT
by
beyond the sea
("If you think it's hard to meet new people, try picking up the wrong golf ball." - Jack Lemmon)
To: Fenris6
Privacy is now defined as the right to kill someone without the police getting in the way.
16
posted on
07/24/2005 10:26:13 AM PDT
by
Mr Ramsbotham
(Laws against sodomy are honored in the breech.)
To: Tumbleweed_Connection
I am not sure why being a jacka@@ does not disqualify Durban from being a member of the Senate.
17
posted on
07/24/2005 10:32:29 AM PDT
by
Sthitch
To: Tumbleweed_Connection
Is there a bigger ass in the US Senate?
18
posted on
07/24/2005 10:32:37 AM PDT
by
My2Cents
("The essence of American journalism is vulgarity divested of truth." -- Winston Churchill)
To: Tumbleweed_Connection
The Senate's number two Democrat said Sunday that if Judge John Roberts doesn't recognize that the Constitution's right to privacy covers the Roe vs Wade abortion decision, it would "disqualify" him from serving on the Supreme Court. Liberals have perverted the Constitution by finding hidden meanings in the Constitution, as if they were ancient priests at the Oracle of Delphi looking for meaning in chicken entrails, and then claiming that such fanciful interpretations must never be challenged.
If there is an absolute "right to privacy" in the Constitution, then why can't I marry my sister.....or my brother for that matter?
If the liberals want a Constitutional right to abortion, then they need to ratify a Constitutional amendment that spells out such a right.
To have a Constitution whose meaning is determined by the interpretation of "penumbras" by Justices with overactive imaginations is the equivalent of living in a theocracy where the High Priests decree whatever law they please and then claim that "The Divine Chicken Entrails Have Spoken".
19
posted on
07/24/2005 10:32:48 AM PDT
by
Polybius
To: Tumbleweed_Connection
"I just basically want to know that if the next case involving privacy and personal freedom came up, what he believes," the Illinois Democrat claimed. Asked, however, what he would do if Roberts "said he did not see a right to privacy in the Constitution," Durbin told MTP host Tim Russert: "I wouldn't vote for him. That would disqualify him in my mind."
Yo da man Senator! I concur. Wow am I glad you represent me.
If Roberts doesn't believe in MY RIGHT TO PRIVACY and PERSONAL FREEDOM to own and/or posses a fully functional sub machine gun, he should be disqualified!
Huh? What's that Dickie, oh, you didn't mean that pertained to firearms.
Oh, so you don't think a right that IS expressly written IN the Bill of Rights is really a right. Okay I see now .....
In all seriousness, the lack of Roberts' record on the 2nd Amendment does have me a tad concerned. If he's a gun owner and hunter like Scalia that's one thing, but if he's a gun owner and 'hunter' like Kerry - then WE have a big problem.
20
posted on
07/24/2005 10:32:57 AM PDT
by
Condor51
(Leftists are moral and intellectual parasites - Standing Wolf)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-79 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson