american conervative news opinion politics the land of the fre

U.S. Government Links	Info on the FairTax	Historic Quotes	Right Wing Thoughts	Book Store	Truth Alerts	Conservative News & Opinion Archive
Read: American Conservative Daily Blog Contact Information

American Values and American Justice

By Patti Bankson

July 29, 2005

Three weeks before the ’04 election I said the real election prize was the (possible) opportunity for the new president to replace Supreme Court retirees. George Bush won the race and the prize, and has named John Roberts, Jr. to replace retiring Justice O’Connor.

In 1992, President George H.W. Bush first nominated John Roberts to the (D.C.) U.S. Court of Appeals, but the Senate, under Democratic control, didn’t allow his nomination to come up for a vote before the White House changed hands. Our current president nominated Judge Roberts again, and although he currently serves on that court, Senate Democrats held up his confirmation for two years.

Thus I’m fascinated when Senate Democratic minority leader Sen. Harry Reid of Nevada, says: he would not “"pre-judge this nomination.” Ha! Ha! Doesn’t have to … that was already done way back when they were making sure his nomination didn’t come up for a vote. Then he said, “The Senate must review Judge Roberts' record to determine if he has a demonstrated commitment to the core American values of freedom, equality and fairness." Does he really want us to believe that prior to 1993 they hadn’t already reviewed his record a gazillion times looking for some way to make him go away? And what does he say they’re looking for? “.. a demonstrated commitment to the core American values of freedom, equality and fairness.” Sorry, Harry, but you’ve got it wrong! He’s not supposed to be committed to American Values, he’s supposed to be committed to the American Constitution, from which we get our freedom and equality and fairness.

Chuck Schumer, (D-NY) is just as fascinating as Harry Reid. As DSCC Chair, he has sent out fundraising emails vowing to fight the Bush Administration over the appointment of “right-wing judges.” But this is what he said in 2000: “We are charged with voting on the nominees. The Constitution does not say if the Congress is controlled by a different party than the President there shall be no judges chosen.” And, "The basic issue of holding up judgeships is the issue before us, not the qualifications of judges, which we can always debate. The problem is it takes so long for us to debate those qualifications. It is an example of government not fulfilling its constitutional mandate because the President nominates, and we are charged with voting on the nominees." (From the Congressional Record, 3/7/00, p. S1211.) Hmmm – one of those American Values -– honesty - seems to be missing here.

The Way I See It, some things liberals call “values” are nothing more than what I believe the signers of our Constitution would consider to be immoral compromises of convenience, at best. Additionally, those so-called values change more often than a teen-age girl deciding what to wear on her first date. The Constitution is a solid, unchanging, foundational document that should be treated as such, and the courts must honor its integrity.