Some constrained by etiquette would call Mr. Teddy Kennedy of Massachusetts honorable.  Fortunately I am not so constrained, nor am I inclined to lie about his honor either.  Senator Kennedy is nothing more than a prime example of what has happened to a once great American political party.

On the floor of the Senate after a marathon of blame deflection on President Bush’s judicial nominees, the non honorable Senator from Massachusetts said that he and the Democratic party would stand up against the President by continuing to prevent up and down votes on his nominees.  Senator Kennedy, to be exact, called them “Neanderthals”.

“Neanderthals” Mr. Kennedy?  Really?  Such names from the party that touts itself as the party of tolerance and inclusion hardly seems right.  Such name calling indeed!  In an attempt to enflame the base of the Democratic Party, Senator Kennedy has showed his true colors once again.

He has shown that he and his fellows feel that it is their Constitutional right to interfere with the advice and consent role of the Senate.  Their role is to allow a vote of the whole Senate.  It is too allow passage of judicial nominees based upon a majority of the Senate for confirmation.  It is not to rewrite the rules of the Constitution to require a super majority of 60 votes for approval.  It is not to hide behind parliamentary procedure.   It is not to stonewall nominees they do not agree with.

However, Constitutional duties are now back seat considerations to political whims where allowing such votes might actually force elected representatives to make their true feelings known in an up and down vote on the nominees.  Political whims are now the over riding force.

Let us take a look at these “Neanderthals”.

The first of them was Mr. Estrada, a respected judge who received praise not only from his fellows but also the highest rating from the American Bar Association.  He happened to be of Latin American decent, which now according to leaked Democratic Party memo appeared to be a big problem for the party and their constituents.  His nomination could not even get a vote because of people like the great and mighty Ted Kennedy and other Democrats who also saw it convenient to stonewall his nomination to attempt to manipulate a favorable outcome in at least one court case where he might have presided if confirmed.

Now we have three women before the Senate for confirmation.  One of them happens to be a “Black” woman who has won reelection with about 70% of the vote.  Yet the non honorable Senator Kennedy and others refer to her as a “Neanderthal” or as “out of the mainstream”.  Again, all of these fine women have received the highest rating of the American Bar Association.

The pot (i.e. the Democratic Party) continues to think itself not dirty here.   Had a Republican or conservative done this immediately there would have been calls of “sexism” or “racism” and demands for resignations hurled by Democrats for such remarks towards a black woman much less the other women.  We see that nothing is above being used as political fodder for some.  And we continue to see the hypocrisy that spews forth from the leadership of a once great American party.

The battle over judges continues to be a thwarting of the will of the people who over the past few years have voted into office a majority of conservatives and Republicans over liberals and Democrats.  Having lost at the ballot box, we now watch as the left wing of this government tries anything short of actually voting on topics such as judges to continue to propel forward its agenda although soundly rejected.

They tout that they have approved the vast majority of this President’s “small potato” judges.  We are to accept this as proof of their good faith as though that makes stonewalling these “bigger fish” judges that actually have the ability to effect the decisions of many of their wrong headed, liberal judiciary colleges better?  They have adopted the strategy that if they approve enough of the low rung judges that it somehow justifies their hijacking of the nomination process when it comes to Federal Circuit Court of Appeals judges and higher which threaten their agenda more.

They accuse the nominees of President Bush of being judges that would “rewrite” the law and are thus unqualified.  Which is laughable.  They cannot cite a single instance where any of these nominees actually rewrote existing law during a decision and legislated from the bench.  Although one wonders why that would be so much a problem when activist judges nominated by the likes of Carter and Clinton still exert their “legislative” power on courts like the 9th Circuit in the west and are the most over turned court in U.S. History.

The answer is simple when we look at these things.  The answer is judicial activism is ok in their book as long as it is done for their goals.  The answer is that once again we see people acusing the oposition of doing exactly what they themselves do in order to deflect blame from them.  The answer is that after loosing at the ballot box their last great hope is to fall back on life appointed judges put into power by their kind in the past.  And by doing this and making this their last great hope they are forced to hold on until the American people make the mistake of placing them back into the majority and allow them to appoint even more of their own judges.

No, this has nothing to do with “Neanderthals”, ”conservative” judicial activism, being unqualified, or what ever excuse the Democrats can come up with.  It has to do with power and regaining that which they feel has been so wrongly stripped from them by the people of this country through elections.  As it stands right now people like Senator Kennedy care not what they can do for their country.  They care only what their country can do for them.