It Takes Just One Liberal to Screw an Entire State
By Scott Editor | Scott's Archive
May 14, 2005

It's amazing how critical the Left has been of President Bush's judicial nominees - labeling them everything from "extreme right-wingers" to "ultra religious conservatives," or whatever else is in the liberal playbook that continually causes them to forfeit power with each passing election to the Republicans.

The fact is no judge nominated by President Bush could in his/her wildest dreams ever be as radical as U.S. District Judge Joseph Bataillon, a Clinton appointee, who on Thursday struck down a constitutional amendment passed by the voters of Nebraska defining marriage as a union between one man and one woman.

Let's take a moment to breath for a second. I know I need to. How could this act of defiance stand? This Judge Bataillon fellow, one man and one man only, spat in the face of -- get ready for this -- seventy percent of the voting populace in the state of Nebraska!

Yes, seventy percent of Nebraskan voters overwhelmingly passed a constitutional amendment to define marriage as they saw fit, and it only took one person to give them the finger. One liberal to say his opinions supersede those of the people. That's not democracy my friends. That's not how our Republic works. That's socialism. Dirty leftist socialism that has no place in the United States of America.

Considering Bush won Nebraska by 66%, a good four percent of non-Bush voters helped to pass the constitutional amendment. Remember that in the 2004 election all eleven states with the "Defense of Marriage Act" on the ballot overwhelmingly passed it, a sure sign of the attitudes of contemporary Americans on gay marriage. Not gays in general as the Left would want you to believe, this is strictly about the institution. Even Oregon, the most liberal of the eleven states and the one with the smallest margin of support for the Defense of Marriage Act, passed the law with 57% support.

I don't care about your thoughts on gays. I have gay friends. I love "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy." We need to put these homophobic labels behind us and stare reality in the face: Seventy percent of the people in Nebraska got screwed last Thursday. There's no positive spin you can put on it. There's no justifying the will of one judge overturning the will of the public.

Until now I've been weighing the judicial filibuster debate pretty evenly with a little more support toward the GOP side, but the travesty in Nebraska shows how horrible liberal justices are for democracy; how horrible for the republic. Please, Senator Frist, end the bickering. No more listening to Democrats whine about how important filibusters are to checks and balances (a term that actually applies between branches not within). Judges must have a narrow interpretation of the Constitution. Judges must enforce the will of the people.

Speaking of Senate history, since when have the Democrats supported longstanding tradition? I thought Democrats were the party of progressives, the party that believes in a "living" constitution. Now they want to pretend to have respect for tradition? Don't buy it.

And I've tried reading leftist material on the filibuster debate, trying to get an idea of what their best arguments are and it's all the same. Democrats can't help but show their contempt for religion and lob the word "extreme" in every paragraph. Just read any progressive newspaper. Any progressive blog or website, especially Joe Conason in Salon Magazine, or the editorial pages in The New York Times.

It's too bad "extreme" and "radical" and "too conservative" aren't constitutional grounds for hexing a judicial nominee. Actually there is no set standard: you either want the guy or you don't. That's why the Republicans' sensible plan to go "up or down" is a sensible one.

If you recall your high school history class, you'll remember that the power to place non-elected officials in government belongs to the president, with a check (that word the Left can't define properly) by the Senate to "advise and consent," not "stall and forever keep the nominees from getting a vote."

If anyone is deserving of the "extreme" label it's the judges who overturn the will of the people every time they use every stretch of the imagination to declare something unconstitutional.

Want to debate this issue with me? Head over to my blog, Aggressive-Voice Daily, and join in on the discussion.

[  Home  |   Book Reviews  |   Movie Reviews  |   Scott's Archive  |   Blog  ]
Copyright 2005 All rights reserved. Contact Editor: Scott