Posted on 09/10/2002 7:28:35 AM PDT by Stand Watch Listen
The Senate Judiciary Committee's "Gang of Ten" has killed another of President George W. Bush's nominees.
Priscilla Owen was, by any measure, extremely well qualified to be on the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. But qualifications are of no interest to a Judiciary Committee dominated by special interests.
What a chance to embarrass the President! Priscilla Owen was Governor Bush's pick for the Texas Supreme Court. The chance to tube a well-qualified woman from the President's home state was too much for this
ideologically driven Committee to resist.
Now watch the Committee's "Gang of Ten" as it tubes an extremely well-qualified Hispanic.
On August 23rd the President said this to a group of new American citizens: "You know, education is the pathway to success, and there's just example after example of people who came here with nothing except a dream or a hope and love and got a good education and succeeded.
"That's what America is about. That's what I love about our country. That's the hope. That's what distinguishes us from many other countries, that we welcome people from all walks of life. We proudly call you an American. We don't say, show us your birth certificate, how you're born, where you're born; you're American and we love you for being in America. We welcomed you to this country.
"And, you know, I've got a shining example right there in Washington I want to share a story with you about, because it's....we've got a little problem up there with this particular fellow. His name is Miguel Estrada. He's a young guy. He came to our country as a teenager. He barely spoke English.
"He had trouble with the language, because he didn't spend any time learning the language. And he got here, and he worked hard, and as a result of a good brain, a brilliant mind, he now has argued 15 cases before the United States Supreme Court.
"I've named him to a high bench, but the Senate won't give him a hearing. Here's a kid who comes to our country, works hard, learns the language. He's a brilliant jurist. He can't even get a hearing. I nominated him over a year and a half ago. I want this man to serve as a bright example of what is possible in America. He'll be a great judge, and the Senate needs to act." (applause).
Well, it appears that the Senate Judiciary Committee will give Estrada a hearing, but he may well suffer the same fate as Priscilla Owen and an earlier nomination, Judge Charles Pickering.
The smear campaign against Estrada has already started. As was the case with Owen and Pickering, once the smear effort starts, the nominee never has the chance to answer the charges.
Estrada has the same problem as the president's other nominees. He believes that judges should interpret the law but should not make the law. He believes that the Constitution means what it says and what the Founding Fathers intended it to mean. He does not buy the nonsense that the Constitution is a living document subject to the political correctness of our time.
And the Senate Judiciary Committee doesn't want such nominees on the bench. The President has nominated over 120 candidates for federal judgeships. Only 73 have been confirmed and most of those are federal district court judges. It is with nominees to the appeals courts, which handle 80% of all cases that go to a higher court, where the Committee has been especially dilatory.
Even with all of the nominations the president has made, there are still 30 vacancies in the courts for which there are yet no nominees. Despite this, the Judiciary Committee won't even hold hearings on most of the nominees the president has submitted.
What has happened in this Committee (one of only three which Majority Leader Tom Daschle has permitted to function because they do as he wishes) demonstrates the power of a single vote.
Often voters I speak with tell me they no longer participate in the process because their vote doesn't count. I don't know how anyone can say that when it comes to the U.S. Senate.
A single vote constitutes the majority and that majority not only has refused to confirm most of the president's judicial nominees, but also has refused to act on some 100 bills passed by the House. They include everything from the energy bill to the measure banning cloning.
If one vote can do this much damage, one vote can also undo the damage. That is something for those who don't want to vote to think about.
(Paul M. Weyrich is President of the Free Congress Foundation.)
Free Congress Foundation
Toward Priscilla Owen, Not Even The Pretense Of Fairness
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: August 01, 2002;
Author: John NowackiThe Owen Nomination: Liberals Don't Let Truth Stand In Their Way
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: July 18, 2002;
Author: John NowackiDemocrats Hold Judicial Nominations for 406 Days and Counting
Source: CNSNEWS.com; Published: June 21, 2002;
Author: Christine HallJudge The Senate Judiciary Committee Not By What It Says, But What It Has Done
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: | June 06, 2002;
Author: John NowackiThe Left Keeps Trying -- And Failing -- To Smear Brooks Smith
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: May 16, 2002;
Author: John NowackiPickering Battle Places Congress on Verge of 'Institutional Crisis'
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: March 07, 2002;
Author: Jeff JohnsonMake them pay for 'Borking': David Limbaugh rebukes spineless Republicans to support Pickering
Source: WorldNetDaily.com; Published: March 5, 2002;
Author: David LimbaughThe GOP's Post-Pickering Strategy
Source: National Review Online; Published: March 1, 2002;
Author: Byron YorkPickering Fight Shows Liberals At Their Worst
Source: Roll Call.com; Publblished: February 21, 2002;
Author: Mort KondrackeStill Pestering Pickering
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: February 19, 2002;
Author: John NowackiDismantling Democracy through Judicial Activism
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: February 12, 2002;
Author:Tom Jipping'A Troubling Pattern': Ideology Over Truth In Judicial Confirmations
Source: Too Good Reports; Published: February 10, 2002;
Author: Paul E. ScatesDemocrats Blast Bush Judicial Nominee
Source: CNSNEWS.com; Published: February 08, 2002;
Susan JonesThe Next Big Fight: The first major judicial-confirmation battle of the Bush administration.
Source: National Review: Published: Feburary 6, 2002;
Author:Byron YorkSYMPOSIUM Q: Should the Senate Take Ideology into Account in Judicial Confirmations
Source: INSIGHT magazine; Published: February 4, 2002;
Authors:
Ralph G. Neas -- YES: The ideology of nominees for the federal judiciary matters more now than ever
Roger Pilon -- NO: Since judges apply law, not make it, the Senate's concern should be with judicial temperamentWhat is the Judiciary Committee Trying to Hide?
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: January 29, 2002;
Author: Thomas L. JippingBlasting Conservative Judges: Liberals Launch Their Campaign
Source: cnsnews.com; Published: January 24 2002;
Matt PyeattJudicial Confirmation Lies, Deception and Cover-up
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: December 11, 2001
Author: Thomas L. JippingSenator Leahy Does Not Meet His Own Standards
Source:.cnsnews.com; Published: December 07, 2001
Author: By John NowackiSenator Daschle Must Remove 'Leaky Leahy' From Judiciary Committee
Source: Too Good Reports; Published: December 4, 2001
Author: Rev. Louis P. SheldonA Disgraceful Blocking of Nominees
Source: The Wall Street Journal (ltr to ed) Published December 3, 2001Mr. Leahy's Fuzzy Math
Source: Washington Times;Published: December 3, 2001
Author:EditorialSen. Patrick Leahy; Our Constitutional Conscience?
Source: Too Good Reports; Published: December 2, 2001
Author: Paul E. ScatesJudicial confirmations called significantly low
Source: Washington Times; Published: November 30, 2001
Author: Audrey HudsonPatrick Leahy - Words Do Kill
Source: PipeBombNews.com; Published: November 29, 2001
Author: William A. MayerJudicial Profiling
Source: The Wall Street Journal; Published: November 27, 2001Sen. Leahy's judicial hostages
Source: Washington Times; Published: November 21, 2001Judges Delayed is Justice Denied
Source: CNSNews.com ; Published: November 20, 2001;
Author: Thomas L. JippingPartisanship is Prevalent with Leahy's Judicial Confirmations
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: November 15, 2001
Author: John NowackiLeahy And Daschle Are Coming Face To Face With Their Own Words
Author: John NowackiObedient Democrats
Source: CNSNEWS.com; Published October 26, 2001
Author: Thomas L. JippingWhy is Daschle Blocking Judges needed to Try Terrorists when we Catch them?
Source: Banner of Liberty; Published:October 26, 2001
Author: Mary MostertPat Leahy's Passive Aggressive Game
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: October 25, 2001
Author: John NowackiOperation Obstruct Justice
Source: Washington Times; Published: October 25, 2001
Author: T.L.JippingDaschle wins struggle over judicial nominations
Source: The Washington Times; Published: Oct 24, 2001
Author: Dave BoyerLeahy doctrine ensures judicial gridlock
Source: Washington Times; Published October 22, 2001Senate's judicial powergrab: Tom Jipping tracks Dems' assault on courts
Source: WorldNetDaily.com; Published: June 28, 2001
Author: Tom JippingDems Will Shut Down Judicial Confirmations
Source: CNSNews.com Commentary from the Free Congress Foundation; Published: June 13, 2001;
Author: Thomas L. Jipping
The current judicial nominations situation a disgrace. Leahy is a disgusting traitor. Ditto the drunken, bloated murderer of young women.
The Hispanic vote awaits...
The President has been good politically, but they need to play some Thumb-in-the-Eye politics to protect themselves when they are out of Power.
realistically, they should also be pointing out that the Dems Bare majority isn't a Legal one as the Widda Carnahan could have had her election nullified by the Republican Senate, legally, but they didn't play hardball. See what It got them.Lee Atwater should be tossing down Lightning bolts from above.
Estrada was submitted long ago. The Vindictive Committee has refused to vote on him.
Quite frankly, I'd be shocked if the Dems allowed a vote on Estrada before the elections. They could seriously hurt their stock with Hispanic voters throughout the nation.
Well, that's not how it came across, based on this comment of yours.
If he sends him up before election time, expect him to go the way of Owens.
Obviously you intended the "he" to mean Dasshole or Leaky, but it came right after a discussion about President Bush.
Bush should ask, "Do we want this to continue forever?
-PJ
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.