Showing posts with label nominations. Show all posts
Showing posts with label nominations. Show all posts

Wednesday, July 15, 2009

Justice for All?

President Obama has nominated his first Supreme Court Justice, Sonia Sotomayor. When he spoke of selecting a Supreme Court justice, he said he wanted to choose a woman or a minority. Sonia Sotomayor is both a woman and Hispanic. This limited idea of what sex or race from which to choose bothers me. Should he not simply choose the best person for the job instead of choosing the best from a certain group? Is the United States not worthy of the best? If a Hispanic woman happens to be the best then that is great. Good for her. However, I do not think that Sonia Sotomayor is qualified to be a Supreme Court Justice.


Judge Sotomayor has stated that "a court of appeals is where policy is made." Really? Perhaps someone should let the legislature know that their services are no longer needed because I'm pretty sure that is why they are working. The legislature makes the laws. We do not need legislating from the bench. A court's job is to interpret the law and decide cases brought before it.


“I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life.” This is a statement made by Sotomayor! How does that sound to you? What about this? I would hope that a wise white man with the richness of his experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a Latina woman who hasn't lived that life. I suggest that if a white male judge made this statement he would be lambasted with criticism and not given a chance at advancement and rightly so. Justice is to be blind. The law is to be enforced fairly without favoritism to one sex, race, or ideology. If her race, sex, and experiences trump the Constitution and federal laws then she should not be a Supreme Court Justice. According to Title 28, Chapter I, Part 453 of the United States Code, each Supreme Court Justice takes the following oath:


"I, [NAME], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as [TITLE] under the Constitution and laws of the United States. So help me God."


Regarding the preborn, Senator Jim DeMint stated "When I asked if an unborn child has any rights whatsoever, I was surprised that she said she had never thought about it. This is not just a question about abortion, but about respect due to human life at all stages -- and I hope this is cleared up in her hearings." I would expect someone who has made decisions about abortion to have considered all the facts instead of simply dismissing that there is another human life to consider in a case.


As she testifies before the Senate judicial committee this week she is not getting great reviews.


In response to Senator Coburn on the use of foreign law, Sotomayor says, “There’s a public misunderstanding of the word ‘use.’" Really? Please don't insult Americans by telling us we don't know the meaning of simple words.


When asked if a person has the right to self-defense, she wavers. She starts talking about if she were to go home and get her gun... Um, excuse me, even most crime show watchers know that is not self-defense but revenge. Maybe someone should buy Judge Sonia a dictionary. Certainly I'm not the only one who wonders why she feels as though she must cloud questions and answers with political non-sense.


Republican senators are being criticized for the questions they are asking. Should they go easy on her because she is a woman? I thought women wanted equality. When you are considering someone for such an important job that is a lifetime appointment, you would be negligent not to determine how that person will perform that job. I find it ironic that a person can be chosen for a position based on their sex or race and then criticism of that person's policies is called racist.

Tuesday, February 10, 2009

Big Pushes - Stand Firm

"You never want a serious crisis to go to waste," said Rahm Emanuel, President Obama's chief of staff on November 21, 2008.

It seems that Obama and his team are trying to push through so much legislation and nominations as quickly as possible to overwhelm and/or prevent people from realizing what is being crammed down our throats.

President Obama has nominated four people to the Justice Department who have horrible records on pro-family issues. These are David Ogden, Dawn Johnson, Thomas Perrelli, and Elana Kagan. David Ogden opposes restrictions on abortion and pornography. He filed a brief before the U.S. Supreme Court in support of child pornographer, Steven Knox. Dawn Johnson is the former legal director for NARAL Pro-Choice America. Thomas Perrelli, Obama’s nominee to serve as associate attorney general, represented Terri Schiavo’s husband as he fought to have food and water withheld from his disabled wife. He was successful and she died a horrible death. Elana Kagan lacks the qualifications for solicitor general as she has never argued a case to the supreme court which is the solicitor general's function. Apparently, she has not even tried a single case. She does qualify as a far-left liberal though.

The stimulus bill just passed in the Senate. The House and the Senate still will need to reconcile the bill. It contains grievous governmental growth and interference. President Obama has claimed it there are no earmarks in this bill. I guess he hasn't read it or even been briefed on it. Why are groups like ACORN (which is being investigated for voter fraud) being given 4 billion dollars? Why is there $600 million stipulated for preparation for universal healthcare? $50 million to the National Endowment of the Arts? $650 million to switch from analog to digital TV? $600 million for "climate change" research? The list goes on extremely long. This bill gives money to special interest groups, groups that supported Obama's campaign. Earmarks, pork, special interests, whatever you want to call it, it is wasteful and not stimuli.

Universal healthcare was inserted into the so-called stimulus bill. They want to oversee your doctor's care of you and computerize all your health records. Good-bye privacy. Tom Daschle has said that senior citizens need to just grow old instead of seeking treatment. This is outrageous that people would use the fear of recession to further their own agenda.

The worst offense to me is the provision in the stimulus bill that attacks religious freedom. The provision reads: "PROHIBITED USES OF FUNDS. - No funds awarded under this section may be used for - (C) modernization, renovation, or repair of facilities - (i) used for sectarian instruction, religious worship, or a school or department of divinity; or (ii) in which a substantial portion of the functions of the facilities are subsumed in a religious mission." This is religious discrimination and an affront to freedom of speech. Christian groups such as Campus Crusade, Christian Athletes, Catholic Student Ministries and others could very well be banned from campuses and facilities that would remain open to other non-religious organizations.

This is our nation. We the People of the United States are ultimately responsible for what our nation and what our government does. We must be vigilant. We must pray. We must take a stand for our rights and freedoms. We must not be silent.

"And let us not grow weary while doing good, for in due season we shall reap if we do not lose heart." Galatians 6:9

"Continue earnestly in prayer, being vigilant in it with thanksgiving." Colossians 4:2

CALL YOUR SENATORS AND REPRESENTATIVES. Let them know where you stand. Both your representative and your two senators can be reached at 1-202-224-3121. Find more contact information for your congressional representative and senators here.