Thursday, July 21, 2005

Christian Family Coalition email

I have no idea why the Christian Family Coalition is sending me email, but I just got this. Personally, since we know that Bush is always going to nominate a conservative, I think we need to spend a little time looking at this guy before we automatically fight his confirmation. There's a chance he may not be the worst of all evils.
From: Christian Family Coalition Reply-To: cfcoalition1@bellsouth.net To: xxxxx Date: 21 Jul 2005 07:03:43 -0400 Subject: ALERT - Battle for Supreme Court Begins! ALERT: It took exactly twelve minutes for left-wing groups and liberal Senators to go on the attack against President Bush's conservative nominee to the Supreme Court, Judge John Roberts: * People for the American Way is "extremely disappointed" in the President's selection, saying it's "a constitutional catastrophe." * Alliance for Justice "cannot support Judge Roberts' elevation to the Supreme Court" because President Bush has a "track record of selecting ideologically-driven, divisive candidates for the bench". * The National Abortion Federation "calls upon the Senate to stand up to President Bush's attempt to destroy the fragile balance on the Supreme Court". * Planned Parenthood stated, "The nomination of John G. Roberts raises serious questions and grave concerns for women's health and safety." * Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL), whose most recent controversial remarks came when he compared American troops to Nazis, called Judge Roberts a "controversial nominee" who guarantees a "controversial nomination process." * Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY), immediately announced that "I voted against Judge Roberts for the D.C. Court of Appeals because he didn't answer questions [about his views] fully and openly when he appeared before the committee." * Hinting at a possible judicial filibuster of the President's nominee, Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) announced on Fox News, "The fact that Sandra Day O'Connor stepped down creates an extraordinary circumstance." * MoveOn.org raised $1.3 million to fight Judge Roberts... BEFORE he was even nominated, and reacted to the nomination by calling Roberts "another right-wing crony." * NOW (the National Organization for Women) said of Judge Roberts that "our hard-won rights will be in jeopardy if he is confirmed," and that President Bush chose "to pick a fight. We intend to give him one." * NARAL stated that "President Bush has consciously chosen the path of confrontation, and he should know that we... are ready for the battle ahead." Well, guess what -- SO ARE WE. And with your help, we're going to continue to take the fight directly to the American people -- and we're going to MAKE SURE that far-left Senators like Dick Durbin, Robert Byrd, Harry Reid, Chuck Schumer, Ted Kennedy, Hillary Clinton and others hear the message LOUD and CLEAR from their constituents... especially for the ones that are facing upcoming elections! TAKE ACTION: With President Bush's nomination of Judge John Roberts to the U.S. Supreme Court, we have the opportunity to get a judicial conservative on the Court -- a conservative who will faithfully interpret the Constitution and the laws of our country without legislating from the bench. We must not let the radical leftists sabotage this chance to replace Sandra Day O'Connor's "swing vote" with a solid conservative vote. As we saw in the recent "Kelo" decision to take away our private property rights, ONE VOTE can make all the difference in the world. We've ALREADY begun fighting in "battleground" states like West Virginia, where Hiram Lewis, a military hero in the liberation of Iraq, has a growing campaign against the far-left Robert Byrd. We need YOUR help to apply pressure to "red state" Democrats like Sen. Ben Nelson in Nebraska and Sen. Bill Nelson in Florida, to make sure that they vote FOR Judge Roberts on the Senate floor. We especially need to make sure the "Gang of Fourteen" judicial filibuster compromisers -- like Sen. Mike DeWine in Ohio, who's up for re-election -- do NOT allow another filibuster to take place. Will you stand with us today, to do even more? We plan to run radio ads, television ads, print ads, and of course ongoing internet efforts against the building liberal onslaught. Please make your best donation right away to help us FIGHT BACK against the radical leftist groups and liberal & compromising Senators! Click here to contribute now: https://secure.responseenterprises.com/rightmarchpac/?a=33 NOTE: You can also send a FREE message directly to your two Senators at http://capwiz.com/sicminc/issues/alert/?alertid=7853081&type=CO telling them to confirm Judge Roberts quickly. Be sure to send this Alert to EVERYONE you know who wants to see President Bush's conservative Supreme Court nominee confirmed in the U.S. Senate. Thank you! Sincerely, William Greene, President RightMarch.com PAC DONATE NOW: https://secure.responseenterprises.com/rightmarchpac/?a=33 If you prefer to mail in your donation, please send it to: RightMarch.com PAC Dept. Code 7 2400 Earlsgate Court Reston, VA 20191

2 Comments:

At 12:47 PM, Blogger Unknown said...

I think that the quick negative reaction on some people's part is due more to lack of trust in the President than to any knowledge of Judge Roberts. I share that mistrust of President Bush.

There are things about Roberts that give me pause, however. First is his recent judicial opinion supporting police for arresting a child for the incredible crime of eating a french fry in the subway. He seems to think that the arrest was a bad idea, but not unconstitutional. I need to know more about the case before I make up my mind about that one. Clearly an excessive solution to a minor problem, though.

The other is the legal arguments he wrote in Bush v. Gore, and his argument that Roe should be overturned. Was that just a lawyer working for the views of his client, or are they reflective of his views? either gives me concern. If they were his views, he is clearly out of the mainstream, and if he just was 'doing his job', then is he unprincipled? I could not argue in front of the Supreme Court for something I didn't believe in, especially for such important issues. I understand that lawyers do this every day, maybe that's why I never went to law school.

I know with Bush as President, we are going to be stuck with a conservative in the court. Is the most rabid right-winger out there? Probably not. Liberals lost this fight at the ballot box in 2000 and 2004, and need to work harder there to change this in the future.

I will hold final judgement (pun intended ;-) regarding Roberts until all the facts shake themselves out of all the rants of both sides. I acknowledge that the court will undoubtedly move to the right with this nomination, but will concentrate my political efforts in places where we can win over the long term, in the state and local political races where we can begin to build a truly progressive base to change the country over time.

 
At 7:12 PM, Blogger Paul Wilczynski said...

Presto,

I totally agree that the negative reaction is more because Bush choose him than whatever we know about him so far.

We do have to be careful in thinking about whether something is unconstitutional or not. I'm not any sort of lawyer much less a constitutional expert, but I'm sure there are a gazillion things that are bad but not unconstitutional.

I'm guessing his argument about Roe was written because his client wanted him to write it. I'll also guess that we're going to be hard pressed to definitively understand how he would rule on issues that are abortion related.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home

">