[rface]

Why didn't the 'Rats stay and filibuster all weekend?

[Faithfull]

The Rats didn't stay and filibuster all weekend because the Republicans needed their time off. Any way you look at it, the first strategy of the REpublicans was to make sure they had their time off- principles come second. There is no other reasonable explanantion as this should be playing out now around the clock on C-Span for maximum advantage.

[Behind Liberal Lines]

The Republicans were fools not to require them to filibuster all weekend.

[uncbob]

President Bush's nomination of Miguel Estrada for a federal judgeship has exposed sharp divisions among Latinos, who are weighing the possibility of having one of their own on a fast track to the US Supreme Court against a fear that the minority group's interests could be harmed if the Senate confirms the conservative lawyer of Honduran descent.

So in the end it comes down to conservative versus the left wing in the Latino community as well as the non Latino community and the RACE should not be played by the GOP >

Latinos know what etnicity Estrada is

[TruthShallSetYouFree]

The Constitution gives the President the right to choose federal judges, with the approval of the majority of the Senate. The Senate is supposed to decide whether or not the candidate is qualified. There is no requirement that he be a liberal, a Latino, or anything else; just that he be qualified, which, according to The American Bar Association, he clearly is. That nasty document that was created in 1789 always gives democrats fits, as they try to circumvent it.

[TShaunK]

see the quote in the Globe "estrada has an hispanic name but has done nothing to help the hispanic community

No you ashole he was to busy helping himself to be sombody try it sometime.

[Marauder]

There's nothing like a presidential appointment of a conservative member of an ethnic minority group to get the liberal democRats spontaneously and vividly to illustrate just what utter fools they are.

Their behavior is similar to the way chickens will behave if you feed them one kernel of corn at a time.

[Polybius]

National Council of La Raza, a Latino group

For the record, "La Raza" is not a "Latino" group. It is strictly a Mexican group.

[BIGZ]

The statement of Tina Romero-Goodson says it all. "My culture", not the American culture. This United States is not the melting pot of the past, no matter how hard the anti American group wants you to beleive it is, the immigration situation is not the same.

The Balkanization of the US is well underway thanks to the liberals and other Demacrats and they are to dense to see it.

Blacks should be up in arms, they will be the first to suffer, there is no Rainbow coalition no matter how hard Mr. Jackson wishes it to be so.

We must wake up folks. Take a hard look at those behind the Anti-War movement this weekend. Just like in Chicago, it's a Three Ring Circus, I rest my Case.

[sweetliberty]

"''That Miguel Estrada is of the Hispanic culture counts far more than the fact that he is a Republican or a Democrat,'' said Tina Romero-Goodson, a social service official in New Mexico."

And that is the crux of many of our problems. The only thing that should matter in judicial nominations is that the individual in question is well-versed in the law and believes in upholding the Constitution in the interest of ALL Americans. What we do NOT need is ANY judicial appointee who is there to uphold the special racist interests of a particular group, which is obviously all that many of these contentious groups seem to care about.

"Estrada's nomination to the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia has been endorsed by the Hispanic Bar Association, US Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, the Latino Coalition, and the League of United Latin American Citizens, which is comparable to the NAACP. Opposed are the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund, the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund, and the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, whose members are Democrats"

What is wrong with this picture? This list reads like a who's who of organizations in Latin America. THIS is AMERICA and I don't believe that the drafters of the Constitution cleared it with a bunch of foreigners before establishing it as the law of the land. To h*ll with these people. I have nothing but contempt for groups who try to set themselves apart for special consideration beyond that of being American, but then of course, most of us are aware that being American really isn't the intent of groups such asla raza.

[sweetliberty]

"He has said that his being Hispanic would be irrelevant to his role as a judge."

As it should be.

"I don't want it to be irrelevant, and neither does the community."

If you don't like it that a judge is able to be fair and rule in accordance with the Constitution instead of legislating from the bench to benefit certain segments of the population, many of whom are not even American citizens, at the expense of others, then I would say that that is YOUR problem. He is being called to serve, or should be, because of his qualifications, NOT because of his race. Why is it that genuine equality is anathema to those who proclaim themselves to be champions of racial equality? Could it be because their motives are questionable?

[Dan from Michigan]

Others felt that his views would be harmful to the community. That's exactly what's happening here.''

Those are the key words.

Of Menendez, de Posada added: ''He's a Cuban-American who looks completely white. I wonder: Has he faced the racism and isolation that other Hispanics have faced? Can you challenge his Hispanic-ness? I would never do that. He's a success story. But so is Miguel Estrada.''

Bwhahahahah. I love seeing it thrown back in his face.

[votelife]

Dear President Bush,
With the Surpeme Court session getting ready to close, it may well be time for perhaps the most important domestic decision of your presidency: the appointment of a Supreme Court Justice(s). The main reason why I supported you in 2000 and why I wanted Daschle out of power in 02 (and 04) has to do with the courts. I want America courts to interpret law, not write law. During your presidential campaign you said Thomas and Scalia were your two model justices. Those are excellent models. The High Court needs more like them. Clarence Thomas recently said to students that the tough cases were when what he wanted to do was different from what the law said. And he goes by the law. This should be a model philosophy for our justices. Your father, President Bush lost his reelection campaign for 3 main reasosn, as far as I can see. 1. he broke the no new taxes pledge 2. David Souter 3. Clinton convinced people we were in a Bush recession (which we had already come out of by the time Clinton was getting sworn in)

I urge you to learn from all three of these: 1. on taxes, you're doing great. Awesome job on the tax cut. 2. good job so far on judicial appointments. I want to see more of a fight for Estrada, Owen, and Pickering, but I commend you on your nominations. 3. by staying engaged in the economic debate you'll serve yourself well

I have been thoroughly impressed with your handling of al Queida, Iraq, and terrorism. You have inspired confidence and have shown great leadership.

But I want to remind you that your Supreme Court pick(s) will be with us LONG after you have departed office. I urge you to avoid the tempation to find a "compromise" pick. Go for a Scalia or Thomas. Don't go for an O'Connor or Kennedy. To be specific, get someone who is pro-life. Roe v Wade is one of the worst court decisions I know of, and it's the perfect example of unrestrained judicial power.

I know the temptation will be tremendous on you to nominate a moderate. But remember who your true supporters are. I am not a important leader or politician. I am "simply" a citizen who has been an enthusiatic supporter of you. I am willing to accept compromise in many areas of government but I will watch your Court nomiantions extremely closely. What the Senate Dems are doing right now is disgusting, but as the President you have the bully pulpit to stop it. Democrats will back down if you turn up serious heat on them.

Moreover, I think public opinion is shifting towards the pro-life position. Dems will want you to nominate a moderate, but almost all will vote against you anyways. Pro-choice Repubs will likely still vote for you if you nominate a Scalia, after all, you campaigned on it. So Mr. President, I urge you to stick with your campaign statements and nominate justices who believe in judicial restraint, like Scalia and Thomas.

Happy Memorial Day and may God bless you and your family.