A Constitutional Obamanation?

Center for Individual Freedom ^ | June 6, '08 | staff

[T.L.Sink]

While most of the ink being spilled and talk being aired is focused on what the political pundits - as well as their followers in the MSM - deem to be the the crises of today (gas prices, housing downturn, economic news, etc.) there has hardly been a mention of the fact that the next President will choose, at least two, if not three or more, justices of the Supreme Court. The actuarial facts are that Justice Stevens is an octogenarian at 88, and is followed by five colleagues who have all long-since passsed Social Security's retirement age. McCain has said he believes judges should interpret the law rather than legislate from the bench and has said he would appoint judges like Roberts and Alito. Obama is of a different mind entirely. Indeed, so much so, that an Obama presidency would put voices on the High Court - not to mention the other numerous federal courts from coast to coast - that would assure liberal judicial activism. Notably, Obama not only voted against confirming Roberts and Alito but told why he did. He said "What matters on the Supreme Court is...those cases can only be determined on the basis of one's deepest values, one's core concerns and the depth and breadth of one's empathy." Thus, Obama said he believes, "in those difficult cases, the critical ingredient is supplied by what is in the judge's heart."

[T.L.Sink]

The article continues: "He didn't stop there. He went on to explain just what political and social views should be in every "judge's heart." He said "affirmative action is an appropriate response to the history of discrimination in this country" and that "a general right of privacy encompasses a more specific right of women to control their reproductive decisions." Obama said he rejected Justice Roberts because in his "personal opinion" he used his "formidable skills on behalf of the strong in opposition to the weak." Obama said much the same when addressing Planned Parenthood Action Fund. We need judges who have the "heart" and "empathy" to "recognize what it's like to be poor or African-American or gay or a young teenage mom - and that's the criteria by which I'll be selecting my judges." All of this is to say that Obama doesn't believe in the Constitution. After all, neither the Constitution nor any law that we know of says that judges should favor the weak over the strong, the poor over the rich, the black over the white, or the individual over the state."

[smedley64]

"... He said "affirmative action is an appropriate response to the history of discrimination in this country..."

Stand by for "...Monetary reparations are an appropriate response to the history of discrimination in this country..." to be one of Obama's "litmus test" pillars for SCOTUS.

Just remember though, he's a uniter! Keith "I get to blow him first!" Olbermann and Chris "tingly" Matthews told me so!

[oldbrowser]

neither the Constitution nor any law that we know of says that judges should favor the weak over the strong, the poor over the rich, the black over the white, or the individual over the state."

It's all about feelings with Obama and the Libs. This is exactly why the constitution is the highest law of the country.

[darkangel82]

Obama is making the bitter McCain pill easier to swallow.

[SandRat]

http://incognito73.instablogs.com/entry/barack-obama-speaks-with-forked-tongue-or-the-art-of-political-pandering/

[hellbender]

" the depth and breadth of one’s empathy....what is in the judge’s heart.”

Clearly Hussein's own "empathy" does not extend to the preborn, or even to infants newly born after botched abortions, and what is in his heart is murder. Those are the values he also seeks in judges. The man is a lying, satanically motivated monster.

[Who is John Galt?]

Obama said he believes, "in those difficult cases, the critical ingredient is supplied by what is in the judge's heart."

That is nothing but a retreat to the time when kings ruled over men. Kings were not elected, but reigned for life, and ruled as their hearts led them (which also obviously describes liberal judges). What Obama describes is NOT the rule of law...

[Blood of Tyrants]

Obama is of a different mind entirely. Indeed, so much so, that an Obama presidency would put voices on the High Court - not to mention the other numerous federal courts from coast to coast - that would assure liberal judicial activism.

And THAT is exactly why we cannot sit at home and pout because McCain isn't who we wanted.

[JCG]

Obama said he believes, "in those difficult cases, the critical ingredient is supplied by what is in the judge's heart."

Or, if the case involves the Chicago Outfit, what's in the judge's pocket.

----

Send treats to the troops...
Great because you did it!
www.AnySoldier.com

[FortWorthPatriot]

"And THAT is exactly why we cannot sit at home and pout because McCain isn't who we wanted."

"And THAT is exactly why we cannot sit at home and pout because McCain isn't who we wanted."

"And THAT is exactly why we cannot sit at home and pout because McCain isn't who we wanted."

"And THAT is exactly why we cannot sit at home and pout because McCain isn't who we wanted."

"And THAT is exactly why we cannot sit at home and pout because McCain isn't who we wanted."

"And THAT is exactly why we cannot sit at home and pout because McCain isn't who we wanted."

Bears repeated repeating.

[kickonly88]

Yeah, no joke!

[T.L.Sink]

Thanks for that link. I know all the towns referenced and don’t live far from Boca Raton. I’m in Florida’s 19th CD and I’ve seen our Jewish congressman, Bob Wexler, parade around with Obama before Jewish organizations and try to convince them that Obama isn’t anti-Israel. It isn’t going down. It’s also obvious that even Wexler doesn’t have his heart in it and is just doing the required thing - spouting the party line on behalf of Obama. And Gen. McPeak has a proven record of anti-Semitism. Jewish voters are very sophisticated. Although they are mostly Democrats, they aren’t fooled by someone who has been pals for decades with the likes of Wright, Farrakhan, Ayers, and Pfleger.

[T.L.Sink]

Exactly. See my post on 6/3 titled “Tax and Spend Less Liberal: Keith Olbermann.” Chris “tingly-leg” Matthews is nothing more than a shill for Obama. He and Olbermann are such obvious hack propagandists that even intelligent Democrats are embarressed. Look at the MSNBC ratings!

[pacpam]

Historically here have been more and less Supreme Court Justices than the number we have today serving on the bench. If McCain is elected and the likes of Shumer said take our pick or no one, then the sitting justices will just have to limp along with less jurists. Guess what, the majority would no longer be of the liberal bent. Oh my, oh my.

[T.L.Sink]

Right - to Obama and the liberals it’s not about interpreting the law but how one “feels” about it and how one can pervert its true meaning to advance one’s personal political agenda.

[T.L.Sink]

I think so. As a defeated Tancredo/Hunter supporter I don’t think much of McCain. But at least he’s right on a few issues. Obama is more consistent - he’s WRONG on every issue.

[T.L.Sink]

It’s clear from his address to Planned Parenthood, and elsewhere, that he’s in favor of abortion. I havn’t heard his views yet on late-term asbortion which even some liberals recognize is nothing more than infanticide. It will be interesting if the fawning MSM will ever ask their “messiah” about that.

[djsherin]

Obama’s presidency is all about feeling. Hope, unity, change... what do any of these mean? They are obviously terms to elicit emotion and passion over reason and logic. Any one of those things for the sake of itself is meaningless. Unfortunately Republicans selected the brilliant John McCain as the only viable alternative. This Republic and specifically the Constitution are not based on feeling; they are based on reason and the rule of law.

[T.L.Sink]

You’re right. Jump ahead to my post #16. Thanks,

[T.L.Sink]

Exactly. But what else can one expect from one who went through law school as an “affitmative action faker?” By the way, I posted a marvelous article by Mark Steyn on FR titled “Mrs. Grievance” about Michelle Obama and how she went through all her higher education as an affirmative action recipient and yet bitterly condemns the American society that gave her this advantage! Check it out.