Posted on 09/13/2005 5:00:01 PM PDT by rhema
The hearings for John Roberts as the President’s choice for Chief Justice of the Supreme Court began Monday morning. True to form, Senator Dianne Feinstein reiterated her “additional role” as spokesperson on behalf of women, specifically 145 million women and pro-abortion rights. On August 25, I wrote to Senator Feinstein in an attempt to help her remove the self-imposed burden of representing this many women in the hearing process.
The good news for the Senator is that she does not represent that many women on any issue. And it should be music to her ears that the polls have drastically changed on the issue of abortion itself: a 2003 survey by The Polling Company found that 54 percent of women identify their position on abortion as falling within one of three “pro-life” positions. Additionally, the 2003 study by the Center for the Advancement of Women showed that among twelve top issues for women, abortion ranked number eleven; it was well outpaced by issues such as “improving women’s health care” and “child care.”
Senator Feinstein used her opening remarks Monday to recite a litany that included the fight for women’s suffrage and numerous other issues. But she used this tactic to camouflage the one issue to which she and Senator Boxer have been inextricably tied: the extreme pro-abortion lobby – groups that don’t even support parents’ right to be notified when their under-aged daughter is set to have an abortion. This association with the radical left is at the core of everything Ms. Feinstein will say and do during these hearings.
But, she will not -- indeed, she cannot -- vote to support one of the most qualified judges ever nominated to the Court lest she abandon the base which has supported her over the years.
The “Roe” in Roe v. Wade, Norma McCorvey, long ago repented for the part she played in the wrongly decided Supreme Court decision in 1973. But, sadly, Senator Feinstein is caught in an age of long ago and far away, before science brought imaging machines of babies in their mother’s womb sucking their thumbs to public attention. And before so many women experienced the painful truth of the abortion issue personally.
As Newsweek accurately reported the day before President Bush nominated Judge Roberts to replace retiring Justice Sandra Day O’Connor on the Supreme Court, pro-abortion activists met at the headquarters of NARAL Pro-Choice America and, after canvassing a long list of potential candidates, concluded they could support NO candidates. Clearly, no nominee from a conservative president could satisfy the fringe wing of the liberal base and Senator Feinstein is the general leading those misguided troops.
Mrs. Mackey is vice president for government relations at the Family Research Council.
What makes this even more odd is that in 2003, Feinstein supported Roberts' confirmation to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. So did Joe Biden and John Edwards, if I'm not mistaken.
The Fem Dems are proof of why it isn't always a good idea to have women in powerful positions.
please note 'isn't always' before you flame me into ashes.
There are plenty of leftist male Dems who are just as radical and militant. Does that mean it isn't always a good idea to have men in powerful positions?
Since she claims to support women, she should be obligated to point out that abortion hurts women for years after the fact.
Feinstein really made a fool out of herself today - moaning about that mistaken quote from Roberts during his time with Reagan's justice dept. stating that he didn't know if it was wise to push women out of the home to be lawyers when he meant it as a joke that there are / were too many lawyers. Feinstein tried to change the subject, she appeared to be so hard up she couldn't even get the joke.
"The Fem Dems are proof of why it isn't always a good idea to have women in powerful positions."
I'm a woman, and I won't quarrel with this statement. When you actually THINK about Landrieu/Blanco/that idiot Boxer/and Difi (not to mention Maxine "I'm a Victim" Waters, Barbara Lee, and many others too numerous to mention), I'm amazed anyone with a brain votes for these bimbos. They've set women back 20 years.
It's really hard for a guy to take them seriously, that's fer sure.
ruthless, but incompetent.
No, I think DEM is the keyword.
Their all bleeding heart socialists. I loathe them.
Maybe it's not odd. Maybe they knew something we don't and now they're just posing to stay in the good graces of their own party.
When writing about democrat female pols I could use expressions such as, Buck Foxer or Puck Felosi, but with Feinstein I am right out of luck.
How about "Fitch Beinstein"?
"I'm a woman, and I won't quarrel with this statement. When you actually THINK about Landrieu/Blanco/that idiot Boxer/and Difi (not to mention Maxine "I'm a Victim" Waters, Barbara Lee, and many others too numerous to mention), I'm amazed anyone with a brain votes for these bimbos. They've set women back 20 years."
I have to agree and you said it very well. Being a female sometimes I even think it was a mistake to give women the right to vote.
Why is it that you can walk into a room with the TV on, the sound off, see a female and determine which political party they belong to?
I've been trying to think of a prominent member of the Republican party that make such spectacles of themselves as these democrats do by the asinine, idiotic, embarrassing statements they make. Do they not know any better or do they not care?
Funt Ceinstein?
"Why is it that you can walk into a room with the TV on, the sound off, see a female and determine which political party they belong to?"
I hadn't thought about this, but you're absolutely right!
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.