Alito Scores!

14 01 2006

Bush: 2
Liberals: 0

Why do they bother? Why do liberal senators try to falsify another supreme court nominee’s associations?

Ted Kennedy, the face Democrats chose to oppose the Honorable Samual Alito, actually tried to show that an association Alito had with a conservative Princton alumni group proved he was a right-wing fanatic. Kennedy is missing a few screws in his head. And we know HE has little integrity himself. Why else would he vote for Alito in 1987 when Reagen nominated him to be a U.S. District Attorney? Or in 1990 for the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals? Why smear him now?

Kennedy and the liberals are standing on top of the Capitol building and screaming, “We want our power and political agenda’s!! We want judges who will rule what the law should be!!” Alito fits neither of those bills. He is precisely what the Founders designed the Supreme Court judges to be – one who interprets the Constitution, not amends it via judicial activist, as many leftist judges have done.

Now, Democrats are fearing the worst. “If confirmed,” blustered Kennedy, “Alito could very well fundamentally alter the balance of the court and push it dangerously to the right.” Sen. Hillary Rodham-Clinton concurred: “The fate of the Supreme Court hangs in the balance.” Chuck Schumer added, “Alito is a controversial nominee for a pivotal swing vote on the High Court who could shift the balance of the court, and thus the laws of the nation, for decades to come.”

May I ask, what balance? As penned by Alexander Hamilton, “There is not a syllable in the Constitution which directly empowers the national courts to construe the laws according to the spirit of the Constitution…”

Samual Alito IS a judge who believes judges shouldn’t be legislators, nor administrators. He has proven to be a strict constructionist who supports states’ rights and thinks the First Amendment restricts only Congress when it comes to the Left’s sacred, but bogus “wall of separation between church and state.” He has certainly not found any language in our Constitution suggesting a “right” to terminate the life of children before they are born, or that husbands — and parents in the case of minors — should not be notified before an abortion.

At least he is NOT a spoiled trust baby who got kicked out of Harvard for cheating. Nor is he a Massachussetts senator who got drunk, drove a young female campaign worker to her death, then chose not report it to authorities until the next day, and then, only after calling his lawyer, concocting an alibi and developing a strategy to contain the political fallout.




Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: