Alpine Summit

Tuesday, July 26, 2005

Kerry Kalls for Kooperation

(Hat Tip: Right Thoughts - warning: profanity) John Kerry, who isn't part of the judiciary committee, has demanded Bush and Roberts release all documents about Roberts and how dare they not do what he says.

"We cannot do our duty if either Judge Roberts or the Bush administration hides elements of his professional record," said the Massachusetts senator who was his party's presidential candidate last year.

...

Kerry is not a member of the committee. But he nonetheless injected himself into the debate at the end of a week in which Bush appeared to catch Democrats off guard by picking a court candidate with conservative credentials, yet one with little judicial experience, and thus, little public paper trail. Roberts would replace retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, who often provided the decisive vote in split decisions, sometimes siding with conservative justices and sometimes with the liberals.

"The American people should know whether John Roberts will protect their constitutional rights if confirmed as a justice to the court," Kerry said in a statement.


The only reason Kerry has made this comment is because he wants the publicity. Maybe he thinks he still has a shot a president again in '08. Whatever the reason, the guy is an absolute hypocrite. After stonewalling Republicans' calls for him to release his military records pertaining to the purple hearts he was always more than willing to show anyone, whether or not they cared to see them, he's whining that Roberts hasn't released enough documentation for them to be satisfied. Rest assured, there will never be enough documentation for these lunatics. I wouldn't be surprised if they lose some political capital trying to fight Bush on this one. Most Americans acknowledge that Roberts is the absolute best candidate for the SCOTUS and the Democratic senators will only underline their reactionary obstructionist behavior to those who haven't seen it yet. Then there was this little gem:

Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois, the Senate's No. 2 Democrat, said he voted against Roberts in committee for his appeals court seat two years ago partly because he didn't feel the nominee fully answered senators' questions.

"I urged Judge Roberts, as far as he can legally within the canons of ethics, to be forthcoming and honest with his answers," Durbin said after their meeting. "If he is open and honest, I think it will go a long way."


Dick "Our Troops are Nazis" Durbin complains that Roberts was not forthcoming 2 years ago? Perhaps it was because you kept asking him hypotheticals where the law was omited and only saught to see where his ideologies were. That's the thing that really eats at Democrats about this nominee- he follows the law and they can't use the usual "right-wing zealot" mantra of which they have become so used to using.

The fact that they are absolutely twisting and stretching as much as possible to try and delegitemize this candidate is not only political hackery at the expense of the nation, but also illustrates how the Democrats have become a reactionary party whose only consistant viewpoint for the past couple of decades has been "Republicans are wrong."

|