The Democrats, once again, are on the wrong side of a Civil Rights debate - and they are using the same old obstructionist tactic in the Senate. ProverbsDaily quotes [LA Times Editorial Page Editor Andres Martinez]* from an LA Times editorial on the history of the filibuster:
A "cornerstone of American democracy" is exactly what Democrats would have you believe the filibuster is. Fortunately for Times readers, Martinez reminds us of the not so bright history of the filibuster.
The Senate filibuster dates back to the early 19th century, but the obstructionist tactic will always be associated with the efforts of the Senate's Southern Dixiecrats to block civil rights legislation in the 20th century....The filibuster kept the federal government from combating racial lynchings, the poll tax and plenty of other outrages
And this time the Democrat-defended injustice is infanticide. The reason for the liberals' unprecedented animosity toward President Bush's judicial nominations is the same reason for conservatives' passionate support. And the fate of abortion hangs in the balance.
Why does this mostly Christian topic blog care so much about the filibuster? It's simple. Some of the reasons for filibustering judges is their pro-life position or their tendancy to base their morality on their religious traditions. Supreme Court justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was a director for the ACLU. A candidate with a similar conservative anti-abortion title would never get through a filibuster. As long as the filibuster is around, strong pro-life federal judges will not be.
However, I don't completely agree with ProverbsDaily. While abortion is certainly the hot topic, the underlying issue is the role of the judiciary. President Bush has nominated primarily those who are strict constructionists: subordinate law is interpreted against superceding law. In the Federal judiciary, law is interpreted against the US Constitution.
In the arena of ideas, liberalism has lost miserably. Liberalism is proving to be such an abject failure that those who espouse it no longer even claim the once-proud label (opting currently for the euphemism "Progressive"). Debate no longer exists; liberals now resort to physical attacks against conservative pundits. Having lost their stranglehold on the Executive and Legislative branches of the Federal government, liberals have turned to their last recourse - an activist judiciary - to enact an agenda that America has resoundingly rejected, again and again.
I don't want a Federal judge making a ruling based on my theology any more than I want a Federal judge making a ruling based on liberalism; I want Federal judges who make rulings based on the US Constitution - the way our Founding Fathers intended the Judicial branch to participate in the check-and-balance system. I don't want Federal judges to rule abortion "unconstitutional" because the Bible says it is wrong; I want Federal judges to rule abortion unconstitutional because this country was founded on the principle that all men are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights, and among them are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; and because laws exist in the country prohibiting murder.
I must hand it to the long-term strategists in the liberal camp; they have carried out a successful, subversive takeover of two key American institutions over the course of the past 40 years: the educational system and the judiciary. Conservatives were entirely too slow and/or oblivious to recognize the threat and counter it. But now, Conservatives are making headway in both arenas, and liberalism is starting to act like the cornered beast that it has become.
Let the hysteria begin.
* (Ed: correction: quote originally mis-credited to US Senator Mel Martinez. Correct attribution of quote per original source.)
(Temporary: original Haloscan Comments - Comments)
