Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Campaign for the Supreme Court
blogs.washingtonpost.com ^

Posted on 07/20/2005 9:11:38 AM PDT by frogjerk

Matt Lauer inteviewed Sen. Kennedy (D-Ma.) on the Today Show his morning. Here are some excerpts:

LAUER: So when you voted against John Roberts in 2003 you said the following, quote, I am concerned about Mr. Roberts' efforts to limit reproductive rights as a government lawyer, his advocacy against affirmative action and federal environmental protection laws, and his efforts to shield the states from individual suits and to limit Congress' ability to pass legislation regulating state conduct in the name of states' rights. Have you changed your opinion in any way on Judge Roberts?

KENNEDY: Well, these are really questions, aren't they? And that's what this whole process is about. We congratulate Judge Roberts with the nomination. And now the president has fulfilled his responsibility; we in the Senate have to fulfill ours. And the real question I think that Americans are thinking about this morning is: Whose side is Judge Roberts really on, on the really important issues of our times?

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: johnroberts; scotus
Kennedy is a joke.
1 posted on 07/20/2005 9:11:39 AM PDT by frogjerk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: frogjerk
Where does he stand on workers' rights? And where does he stand on the issues of reproductive rights? Those are all an open book. And what these hearings are about are really the question and the challenge to make sure that we are going to have someone that stands on the side of working families of the middle class, of ordinary people when you get right down to it.

How about someone that stands for the Constitution rather than your lacky Democrat party base?

2 posted on 07/20/2005 9:13:38 AM PDT by frogjerk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: frogjerk
And the real question I think that Americans are thinking about this morning is: Whose side is Judge Roberts really on

That's what it boils down to for Jabba the Ted ... sides. Never mind what the Constitution says.

3 posted on 07/20/2005 9:15:14 AM PDT by tx_eggman (Does it hurt when they shear your wool off?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tx_eggman

Those of you who know the history of Supreme Court appointments...when did it become so political, or was it always that way?


4 posted on 07/20/2005 9:16:46 AM PDT by BonnieJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: frogjerk
Chappaquidick Ted


5 posted on 07/20/2005 9:19:28 AM PDT by Travis McGee (--- www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com ---)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: frogjerk

Why does Kennedy call it reproductive rights. Non-reproductive rights would be a more accurate description.


6 posted on 07/20/2005 9:30:48 AM PDT by Barb4Bush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: frogjerk
Poor, poor Teddy. Blind drunk at 8:00 AM! He must realize that, as the end approaches, he'll pay the price and spend all of eternity rotting in hell for the deaths of Mary Jo are their unborn child.

He knows pain in this life, too, hoever. He knows that the legacy of his brothers will always be better than that his. He may think he is a better man than either Jack of Bobbie but he now knows that he'll NEVER be able to prove it!

That's what motivates Fat Teddy. He wants to return to power so he can build a legacy. With a dem in the White House and a majority in the Senate, Teddy could be authoring wonderous things. His legacy could surpass that of his brothers. But, he won't. He'll go down in history as the nasty obstructionist, fat, drunken, anti-American would killed his girl friend and child at Chappaquidic. No wonder the guy drinks!

7 posted on 07/20/2005 9:34:50 AM PDT by Tacis ("Democrats - The Party of Traitors, Treachery and Treason!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: frogjerk

you got that right.


8 posted on 07/20/2005 9:53:59 AM PDT by Prophet in the wilderness (PSALM 53 : 1 The ( FOOL ) hath said in his heart , There is no GOD .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Barb4Bush

It's really more of an issue of the rights of a living yet unborn child.

Those rights were completely ignorde in Roe Vs. Wade.

The medical evidence shows that a child is capable of surviving at the age that abortions are legal.

People have been prosecuted and convicted for the murder of unborn children.

Roe vs. Wade is simply not consistent with the constitution or rulings in other cases.

Abortion is murder, and must be treated as such.


9 posted on 07/20/2005 10:18:52 AM PDT by untrained skeptic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: frogjerk

"you [Kennedy] said the following, quote: I am concerned about Mr. Roberts' efforts to limit reproductive rights as a government lawyer, his advocacy against affirmative action and federal environmental protection laws, and his efforts to shield the states from individual suits and to limit Congress' ability to pass legislation regulating state conduct in the name of states' rights."

TRANSLATION: I am disturbed that a lawyer might conform his conduct to the rules of ethics by zealously representing his client in accordance with his ethical responsibility to do so. I do not understand such people, and may not be able to consent to a nomination of a person who may actually follow the rules and laws to which they are bound.


10 posted on 07/20/2005 10:23:47 AM PDT by Laura_RB (What ever happened to merit and common sense?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tacis
Blind drunk at 8:00 AM!

Missed show but was he really drunk or just impaired in logic, facts and/or reason?

11 posted on 07/20/2005 11:04:36 AM PDT by ncountylee (Dead terrorists smell like victory)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: ncountylee
Kennedy is incorrectly quoted. Howie Carr always quotes him accurately. The real quote goes like this:

"Uh, uhh, well, uh, uh, uh these uh are uh really uh questions, aren't uh they? And uh, uhh, uh, that's what uh this whole uh uh uhhh process is uh about."

12 posted on 07/20/2005 11:21:40 AM PDT by jjmcgo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson