Posted on 07/21/2005 1:26:42 PM PDT by JBW
Senator Schumer is planning to use his seat on the Senate Judiciary Committee to reopen a battle he has already lost. "I voted against Judge Roberts for the D.C. Court because he didn't answer questions fully and openly when he appeared before the committee," Mr. Schumer said on Tuesday, referring to President Bush's nominee to the Supreme Court. But despite being rebuked by his colleagues for pressing inappropriate questions on Mr. Roberts when he was a federal appeals court nominee, Mr. Schumer has signaled he is going to revisit the same line of questioning. "It is vital that Judge Roberts answer a wide range of questions openly, honestly, and fully in the coming months," the senator said. Mr. Roberts has been willing to answer questions about his judicial philosophy. "My own judicial philosophy begins with an appreciation of the limited role of a judge in our system of divided powers," he wrote in response to written questions from Mr. Schumer in 2003. "Judges are not to legislate and are not to execute the laws." But Mr. Roberts declined, in response to prodding from Mr. Schumer, to give his personal views in respect of particular decisions. "With respect, Senator, you're getting back in the area of asking me to criticize particular Supreme Court precedents," Mr. Roberts testified in 2003. "I think it's inappropriate because it would be harmful to the independence and integrity of the Federal judiciary. The reason I think key to the independence and strength of the Federal judiciary is that judges come to the cases before them, unencumbered by prior commitments, beyond the commitment to apply the rule of law and the oath that they take."
(Excerpt) Read more at nysun.com ...
For more, see: Fair Game on Confirmation Questions - http://www.pointoflaw.com/archives/001351.php
and Schumer's Vendetta - http://www.jonathanbwilson.com/2005.07.01_arch.html#1121965220593
Schumer gives all the appearances of being a petty, vindictive little man. Thanks, New Yorkers, for electing this putz.
Al D'Amato was so right when he referred to Schumer as a putz-head!
As Orrin Hatch mentioned, Ruth Bader Ginsburg is a radically liberal judge, yet the Republicans did not do to her what the Democrats did to Bork. Bill Clinton had the right to pick her, like it or not. The senate's duty is to determine if the person is CAPABLE of doing the job, not whether the nominee fits their personal political philosophy.
Bork should have sailed through the confirmation proess. Roberts should, too. But kennedy and the other libs have simply decided "We'll vote against people based on whether they appeal to our political philosophy, because we feel like it."
Schumer has a vendetta against anyone who is really Catholic.
God, this guy is an idiot. I have come to realize, through the scrutiny of FR, that some of our US Senators are inept and probably couldn't hold jobs in the private sector.
I don't know who is worse though, Schumer or Durbin. They tell me that just because you're an elected Senator, it doesn't indicate that you're competent or smart. In fact, actually what have these two done in their years in public office other than to be obstructionists and partisan hacks?
charming little slug, isn't he?
Is there anyting more nauseating than hearing these Dem Senators - Schumer, Kennedy, Biden, Dodd, et al - pontificating on the Constitution and the judiciary, speaking down to us as if they are Moses returning from Mt Sinai? Hell, they threw the Constitution away years ago! Bunch of hypocritical lying bloviating gas bags, without a shred of real honor or dignity among them. But I understate!
I think he reflex's badly on New Yorkers that vote for him. They must be as mean and lack class.
Does anyone know what his poll numbers are?
You have to give old Alphonse credit for discerning character.
Do what most of NY does each week when Chuckie does his weekly blabber in front of the cameras press conference -- IGNORE HIM!!!
NYers are masochists. They threw out D'Amato for the putz.
The only true way out of abortion hell is to receive the Lord's forgiveness, and allow Him to remove the guilt and stain of abortion from her soul.
Their party is drowning in quick sand, and the more they struggle, the farther down they go.
The Republican party has been more than kind to democrats (much more than most people would be), and their raving madness is turning the voters off. No one likes an angry, bitter, downer-type person spewing in their face every time they turn on the news!
I'm basically a very happy person, and when I see a democrat hack barking at the TV camera, I have to turn the sound off. Who needs crap like that in their lives?
Californians are turning into the same breed. Liberalism must indeed cause brain damage.
Schumer is about as dumb as they come. Can you imagine a Jewish USA Senator championing the protection of rights for the very people that want to slit his moron throat or behead his useless head from his body. Not too bright, wouldn't you say? But that's the position of the enitre Democrat "traitor/treason" party!!!
I looked up putz in the yahoo dictionary.
Slang A fool; an idiot.
ETYMOLOGY:
Yiddish pots, penis, fool
It seems to fit Mr Schumer really well.
Schumer asked a serious of questions about Schumer's position on present and future cases. Hatch, with the microphones open, suggested the Schumer stop asking "dumbass questions." Schumer said, "Does the Senator wish to revise and extend?" (Giving Hatch a moment to soften his language. Hatch responded, "I said dumbass. I meant dumbass."
So, from now on, I think the Senior Senator from New York should be referred to as Chucky ("Dumbass") Schumer. Or, just remember that when the standard press reference calls him (D., NY) that the D stands for Dumbass.
Congressman Billybob
Fortas became the first sitting associate justice, nominated for chief justice, to testify at his own confirmation hearing. Those hearings reinforced what some senators already knew about the nominee. As a sitting justice, he regularly attended White House staff meetings; he briefed the president on secret Court deliberations; and, on behalf of the president, he pressured senators who opposed the war in Vietnam. When the Judiciary Committee revealed that Fortas received a privately funded stipend, equivalent to 40 percent of his Court salary, to teach an American University summer course, Dirksen and others withdrew their support. Although the committee recommended confirmation, floor consideration sparked the first filibuster in Senate history on a Supreme Court nomination.
http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/minute/Filibuster_Derails_Supreme_Court_Appointment.htm
If Roberts meets this level of dishonesty, I won't object to a filibuster.
LOL!
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.