Media in Trouble: All the news thats UNfit to print!: "the Constitution does not protect a right to an abortion"

"The information of the people at large can alone make them safe, as they are the sole depositary of our political and religious freedom." --Thomas Jefferson 1810

Monday, November 14, 2005

"the Constitution does not protect a right to an abortion"

Great for the Right...Bad for the Left.

Either way, given this revelation, I wonder if Arlen Specter and the other pro-choicers on the Judiciary Committee will be voting on Sam Alito. Or will they let him slip by discussing how his position has somehow "evolved" or "morphed" since 1985.

This is what I don't get, Republicans are fast to bring up the history of Judges who have gotten an up or down vote, yet they are nto willing to use articles of one's personal history to extract opinions about a Judicial Appointee's philosophy:
A leading Republican involved in the nomination process insisted that this does not prove Judge Alito, if confirmed to the Supreme Court, will overturn Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 Supreme Court ruling that made abortion a constitutional right.
"No, it proves no such thing," said the Republican, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. "In fact, if you look at some of the quotes of his former law clerks, they don't believe that he'll overturn Roe v. Wade."


"The issue is not Judge Alito's political views during the Reagan administration 20 years ago," the Republican official said. "It's his 15 years of jurisprudence, which can be evaluated in hundreds of opinions. And in none of those opinions is it evident what his political philosophy is.

Fantastic. As if these folks put on the robe and all their emotions and personal opinions are washed away.

BULLSHIT, here it is straight from the horses mouth:

"I believe very strongly in limited government, federalism, free enterprise, the supremacy of the elected branches of government, the need for a strong defense and effective law enforcement, and the legitimacy of a government role in protecting traditional values," he wrote.
"In the field of law, I disagree strenuously with the usurpation by the judiciary of decision-making authority that should be exercised by the branches of government responsible to the electorate," he added.


When I first became interested in government and politics during the 1960s, the greatest influences on my views were the writings of William F. Buckley Jr., the National Review, and Barry Goldwater's 1964 campaign," he said. "In college, I developed a deep interest in constitutional law, motivated in large part by disagreement with Warren Court decisions, particularly in the areas of criminal procedure, the Establishment Clause, and reapportionment.

Personally, I am getting off the "let's wait for the hearings" train and calling for a fillibuster right now. This guy is obviously a wankerific choice suitable for remaining on the 3rd circuit but certainly unsuited for a seat on the most prestigious Supreme Court.