Senator Schumer and Supreme Court Judges-And THEY Say WE'RE Obstructionist!

This is word for word from Fidelis:

I posted this article while I was on my way to class tonight; there is a companion article in my email.

Lately, since the Republicans in Congress and the grass roots new media have BOTH stood up to the thugs, communists and do-nothings masquerading as respectable members of Congress (i.e., the Democrats), the Democrats have been whining the rest of us are--GASP-- "OBSTRUCTIONISTS".

They say this because we refuse to allow smoky back room deals being shoved down our throats (Immigration). They say this because the President continues to veto their surrender bills--even with the publicity stunt slumber party (in which they knew they didn't have enough votes to override the impending veto). They say this because we have had ENOUGH of their do-nothing, time wasting, tax-payer insulting, feel they can do what they want with OUR tax dollars worthless carcasses. They say this because we DEMAND they listen to the troops on the ground rather than the polls that stroke their already over-inflated egos (Just today one of the farthest left of the dinosaur media actually had to eat crow and acknowledge the truth in Iraq--the surge is WORKING and Iraqis are STEPPING UP to take over their own country and THEY SIMPLY CANNOT HANDLE THIS).

They say this because they are LOSING, because they are the WORST Congress ever inflicted upon this country and because they are terrified the average American citizen has had enough--and they WILL lose their jobs in the next election.

Their credibility is GONE.

You have the SOH conspiring with known states protecting terrorists, on a trip she was advised not to take--and by thumbing her nose at the American people, she screwed up a vitally important message entrusted to her by our ALLY, Israel.

You have a presidential candidate with no experience and no substance, one who swings in the wind and his policy changes when the wind does--stating unequivocally he will meet, without conditions, leaders (thugs?) of known terrorist regimes because we "don't talk enough".

You have a thief and liar finally letting her hair down, coming straight out and saying she intends to turn this country into a communistic, totalitarian state, punishing people for being successful by taking their rightfully earned wealth and plunging this country into the class of a third world country by doing so.

THESE are the people calling US obstructionist.

Now, you have this. A bunch of children saying they're going to blatantly ignore the Constitution in appointing judges because THEY'RE ineffective in running this country. But WE'RE the obstructionists. A bunch of bleating sheep who will NOT be happy until each body bag ever manufactured is filled--hopefully, in their eyes, with one of our troops. Holding funding for those troops (and therefore vitally needed armor, transportation and supplies) in their childish temper tantrums. Withholding funds that WILL lead to more troop deaths because THEY didn't get their way.

But WE'RE the obstructionists.

And, I GUARANTEE the moonbat brigade is going to go stark raving bonkers the more they get "Mitch-slapped"--hopefully, bonkers enough people will turn out in DROVES at election time to GET THESE OBSTRUCTIONISTS OUT OF WASHINGTON.

********************

Schumer to fight any new Bush High Court pick

Carrie Budoff
Politico.com
07-30-2007

New York Sen. Charles E. Schumer, a powerful member of the Democratic leadership, said Friday the Senate should not confirm another U.S. Supreme Court nominee under President Bush “except in extraordinary circumstances.”

“We should reverse the presumption of confirmation,” Schumer told the American Constitution Society convention in Washington. “The Supreme Court is dangerously out of balance. We cannot afford to see Justice Stevens replaced by another Roberts, or Justice Ginsburg by another Alito.”

Schumer’s assertion comes as Democrats and liberal advocacy groups are increasingly complaining that the Supreme Court with Bush’s nominees – Chief Justice John Roberts and Associate Justice Samuel A. Alito – has moved quicker than expected to overturn legal precedents.

Um...perhaps because, rather than follow the principle of stare decisis required of all United States court actions, these previous "precedents" were either actual legislation from the bench or were truly unconstitutional. The reversal should NOT have been necessary because they never should have been legislated from the bench to begin with. The justices job is to INTERPRET the Constitution, not add to it the way Dr. Frankenstein added to his monster--a leg here, an arm there and oh, wait a minute, let's add a second head over there because that's what the "public" (communists aka democrats/liberals) wants.

Senators were too quick to accept the nominees’ word that they would respect legal precedents, and “too easily impressed with the charm of Roberts and the erudition of Alito,” Schumer said.

Once again...the justices causing such an uproar have actually been DOING THE JOB AS DELINEATED IN THE CONSTITUTION. They have begun to overthrow the non-legal "precedents" the better red than dead crowd wanted so badly. Abortion is illegal, not precedent. Nowhere in the Constitution is it acceptable to kill an unborn child and is in fact against the prevailing "law of the land". But then, communists and liberals like to kill helpless things. Further, just as prohibition was an absolute disaster, so was school busing. Prohibition was repealed; now, the ground has been broken for the same treatment to school busing.

“There is no doubt that we were hoodwinked,” said Schumer, who sits on the Senate Judiciary Committee and heads the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.

This is just too stupid to acknowledge.

A White House spokeswoman, Dana Perino, said Schumer's comments show "a tremendous disrespect for the Constitution" by suggesting that the Senate not confirm nominees.

"This is the kind of blind obstruction that people have come to expect from Sen. Schumer," Perino said. "He has an alarming habit of attacking people whose character and position make them unwilling or unable to respond. That is the sign of a bully. If the past is any indication, I would bet that we would see a Democratic senatorial fundraising appeal in the next few days."

From another Fidelis article, here's how they reacted in the past:

“Republicans in the Senate went on to confirm 15 of President Clinton’s nominees. In contrast, the Democrat controlled Senate has only confirmed three of President Bush’s nominees in the first six months of this year. This is barely half the speed of which Senator Leahy considered ‘not acceptable’ seven years ago. Chairman Leahy is perfectly positioned to rectify the injustice of denying qualified nominees an up or down vote,” said Burch.

Schumer voted against confirming Roberts and Alito. In Friday’s speech, he said his “greatest regret” in the last Congress was not doing more to scuttle Alito.

And, why is that, ladies and gentlemen? BECAUSE THE MAN IS TERRIFIED conservative values might actually gain a foothold and be given a chance to grow again--showing him for the red-loving (ever notice how communists like the color red--like blood?) jerk he is.

“Alito shouldn’t have been confirmed,” Schumer said. “I should have done a better job. My colleagues said we didn’t have the votes, but I think we should have twisted more arms and done more.”

Oh REALLY? "Twisted more arms...?" Doesn't that fall under undue duress? Back room deals? Undue influence? LOBBYING?

While no retirements appear imminent, Bush still could have the opportunity to fill another vacancy on the court. Yet the two oldest members – Justice John Paul Stevens, 87, and Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, 74 – are part of the court's liberal bloc and could hold off retirement until Bush leaves office in January, 2009.

Earlier this week, Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter, the Judiciary Committee’s ranking Republican, said he was persuaded by a conversation with Justice Stephen G. Breyer, who spoke with Specter at the Aspen Institute gathering in Colorado this month, to study the decisions of the Roberts Court. The term that ended in June was notable for several rulings that reversed or chipped away at several long-standing decisions, delighting conservatives but enraging liberals.

See above--of course they're going to investigate--they KNOW the decisions they call precedents are illegal and they're terrified the American public will finally wake up. Further, Breyer prefers to rely on "global" precedent rather than AMERICAN/CONSTITUTIONAL precedent. GLOBAL precedent has no bearing in the United States jurisdictions--and he is in blatant contempt of violating the Constitution himself.

Breyer has publicly raised concerns that conservative justices were violating stare decisis, the legal doctrine that, for the sake of stability, courts should generally leave precedents undisturbed.

Once again, stare decisis is required for all jurisprudence issues in the United States; however, it is invalid in dealing with global precedent and with illegal legislation from the bench.

“It is not often in the law that so few have so quickly changed so much,” Breyer said, reading his dissent from the bench in June to a 5-4 ruling that overturned school desegregation policies in two cities.

Well, he certainly tried to do a lot more. I think the green-eyed monster of jealousy plagues this idiot because he simply couldn't accomplish what he wanted to, and that was push more communist/democrat/liberal bias on the country through continued illegal activity from the bench.

Schumer said there were four lessons to be learned from Alito and Roberts: Confirmation hearings are meaningless, a nominee’s record should be weighed more heavily than rhetoric, “ideology matters” and “take the president at his word.”

And those are BAD THINGS??? In whose eyes? The unborn children who will live? The kids who won't be forcibly bused to a school they don't belong in, simply to satisfy a "quota"? And the funniest of all--"take the President at his word". Funny, he doesn't seem to understand that anywhere else.

“When a president says he wants to nominate justices in the mold of [Antonin] Scalia and [Clarence] Thomas,” Schumer said, “believe him.".

Yes--believe him. And, believe him when he says he's going to pull out the veto pen while you fritter troops lives away, while you endanger the country's security and while you embolden the enemy.

********************

Further, when it comes to abuses of the Constitution--all of the communist/democrat/liberals need to take a good look at who the TRUE shredders of the Constitution are--and the best place to start is in their own mirrors.

Now, we need to get back to the basics of said Constitution--quit favoring muslims with the religiosity of their fanaticism while slamming Christians and Jews. Quit giving special consideration to a barbaric, murderous political system (although not as bad as communism has proven to be in sheer numbers of corpses stacking up like cordwood--YET) and their "religious propaganda symbols" over and above the same considerations, beliefs and symbols of other religions such as Christianity and Judaism.

When was the last time you heard of your tax dollars being used to install "religiously acceptable" wash facilities and religiously correct cafeterias on a publicly funded campus for Christians and Jews? You haven't--and you won't. But go to the University of Michigan and that's EXACTLY what they're doing on THEIR campus for muslims--again, with YOUR tax dollars.

Doesn't THAT violate the communist/democrat/liberal belief in separation of church and state (which is, by the way, a COMPLETE misinterpretation of "the government shall not interfere with an individual's right to worship as they please" and something else legislated from the bench to trash all Christian and Jewish holidays).

An alleged hate crime consisting of flushing a koran down a toilet occurred over the weekend at Pace University--yet an alleged "artist" standing a crucifix in a bottle of urine and titleing it "Piss Christ" is considered to be that "artist's" First Amendment right to free expression and no Christian group is allowed to stop it. Where were Alito, Thomas and Roberts then? Oh wait...the communists/democrats/liberals held the majority bloc on the Court at the time. It's okay to "hate" Christians and appease muslims. I forgot there for a minute.

If I had a koran---I'd have a killer bonfire. And I'd fight it ANY "charge" of a "hate crime" as high as I could take it, as loud as I could make it because I'd be indulging MY First Amendment right to free expression. I can hate a book and it's NOT a hate crime.

And the communist/democratic/liberal faction in this country needs to look into their mirrors and confront their Dorian Gray souls--conservatives are rising and it's not going to be pretty for them. The more OBSTRUCTIONIST THEY BECOME--the more powerful WE become in Taking Our Country Back (to paraphrase the name of Snooper's site). It's time to Wake Up America (Spree's site), and get back to our heritage of freedom instead of the communist/democrat/liberal agenda to turn us into the Orwellian world envisioned by them.

[UPDATE] Politico has two excellent articles on this issue here and here.

Sphere: Related Content

Australian Pride or Multi-Culturalism/Diversity Can Take a Flying Leap!

I've seen this before and each time I read it, I WISH this country's so-called leaders, particularly our do-nothing Congress and the communist-loving 2008 democratic presidential candidates were capable of understanding this. However, the vote whores are too busy trying to please everyone while appeasing our enemies. To them I say:

READ THIS YOU IDIOTS--THIS IS AN EXAMPLE OF NATIONAL PRIDE--AMERICANS ONCE FELT THIS WAY UNTIL YOU AND THOSE LIKE YOU DECIDED TO JUMP INTO BED WITH EVERY "FEEL GOOD, FUZZY-WARM, BULLSHIT, KUMBAYA LET'S APPEASE EVERYONE AND SELL AMERICA DOWN THE RIVER FOR OUR OWN PERSONAL AGENDAS" CAME ALONG.

Read this and LEARN (if you're capable) what REAL NATIONAL PRIDE is and how Australia handles this nonsense. LEARN.

Oh, and for those of you who think this is a modern, email "urban legend", Snopes CONFIRMS this as true here:

http://www.snopes.com/politics/religion/australia.asp

********************
Muslims who want to live under Islamic Sharia law were told on Wednesday to get out of Australia , as the government targeted radicals in a bid to head off potential terror attacks.

A day after a group of mainstream Muslim leaders pledged loyalty to Australia and her Queen at a special meeting with Prime Minister John Howard, he and his Ministers made it clear that extremists would face a crackdown. Treasurer Peter Costello, seen as heir apparent to Howard, hinted that some radical clerics could be asked to leave the country if they did not accept that Australia was a secular state, and its laws were made by parliament. "If those are not your values, if you want a country which has Sharia law or a theocratic state , then Australia is not for you", he said on National Television.

"I'd be saying to clerics who are teaching that there are two laws governing people in Australia: one the Australian law and another Islamic law that is false. If you can't agree with parliamentary law, independent courts, democracy, and would prefer Sharia law and have the opportunity to go to another country, which practices it, perhaps, then, that's a better option", Costello said.

Asked whether he meant radical clerics would be forced to leave, he said those with dual citizenship could possibly be asked to move to the other country. Education Minister Brendan Nelson later told reporters that Muslims who did not want to accept local values should "clear off. Basically people who don't want to be Australians, and who don't want, to live by Australian values and understand them, well then, they can basically clear off", he said.

Separately, Howard angered some Australian Muslims on Wednesday by saying he supported spy agencies monitoring the nation's mosques.

Quote: "IMMIGRANTS, NOT AUSTRALIANS, MUST ADAPT. Take It Or Leave It. I am tired of this nation worrying about whether we are offending some individual or their culture. Since the terrorist attacks on Bali , we have experienced a surge in patriotism by the majority of Australians."

"However, the dust from the attacks had barely settled when the 'politically correct' crowd began complaining about the possibility that our patriotism was offending others. I am not against immigration, nor do I hold a grudge against anyone who is seeking a better life by coming to Australia "However, there are a few things that those who have recently come to our country, and apparently some born here, need to understand." "This idea of Australia being a multi-cultural community has served only to dilute our sovereignty and our national identity. And as Australians, we have our own culture, our own society, our own language and our own lifestyle."

"This culture has been developed over two centuries of struggles, trials and victories by millions of men and women who have sought freedom"

"We speak mainly ENGLISH, not Spanish, Lebanese, Arabic, Chinese, Japanese, Russian, or any other language. Therefore, if you wish to become part of our society . Learn the language!"

"Most Australians believe in God. This is not some Christian, right wing, political push, but a fact, because Christian men and women, on Christian principles, founded this nation, and this is clearly documented. It is certainly appropriate to display it on the walls of our schools. If God offends you, then I suggest you consider another part of the world as your new home, because God is part of our culture."

"We will accept your beliefs, and will not question why. All we ask is that you accept ours, and live in harmony and peaceful enjoyment with us."

"If the Southern Cross offends you, or you don't like "A Fair Go", then you should seriously consider a move to another part of this planet. We are happy with our culture and have no desire to change, and we really don't care how you did things where you came from. By all means, keep your culture, but do not force it on others.

"This is OUR COUNTRY, OUR LAND, and OUR LIFESTYLE, and we will allow you every opportunity to enjoy all this. But once you are done complaining, whining, and griping about Our Flag, Our Pledge, Our Christian beliefs, or Our Way of Life, I highly encourage you take advantage of one other great Australian freedom, 'THE RIGHT TO LEAVE'"

"If you aren't happy here then LEAVE. We didn't force you to come here. You asked to be here. So accept the country YOU accepted."

Maybe if we circulate this amongst ourselves, American citizens will find the backbone to start
speaking and voicing the same truths!

NOTE: ALL emphasis mine.

Sphere: Related Content

Driving The Leftinistra INSANE

Cross posted from Snooper

A blurb from the NY Slimes:

VIEWED from Iraq, where we just spent eight days meeting with American and Iraqi military and civilian personnel, the political debate in Washington is surreal. The Bush administration has over four years lost essentially all credibility. Yet now the administration’s critics, in part as a result, seem unaware of the significant changes taking place.

Here is the most important thing Americans need to understand: We are finally getting somewhere in Iraq, at least in military terms. As two analysts who have harshly criticized the Bush administration’s miserable handling of Iraq, we were surprised by the gains we saw and the potential to produce not necessarily “victory” but a sustainable stability that both we and the Iraqis could live with.

Read the rest at the NYT

Sphere: Related Content

Myth vs Fact-Part 38

Myth

Fact

Islam: Religion of peace.

Myth Fact Islam: Religion of peace. 4:95-97 Not equal are those of the believers who sit (at home), except those who are disabled (by injury or are blind or lame, etc.), and those who strive hard and fight in the Cause of Allâh with their wealth and their lives. Allâh has preferred in grades those who strive hard and fight with their wealth and their lives above those who sit (at home). Unto each, Allâh has promised good (Paradise), but Allâh has preferred those who strive hard and fight, above those who sit (at home) by a huge reward; Degrees of (higher) grades from Him, and Forgiveness and Mercy. And Allâh is Ever Oft­Forgiving, Most Merciful. Verily! As for those whom the angels take (in death) while they are wronging themselves (as they stayed among the disbelievers even though emigration was obligatory for them), they (angels) say (to them): "In what (condition) were you?" They reply: "We were weak and oppressed on earth." They (angels) say: "Was not the earth of Allâh spacious enough for you to emigrate therein?" Such men will find their abode in Hell - What an evil destination! Tafsir: 1 2 3 4

Sphere: Related Content

American Support For the War Part #2

Remember when we showed you this graph?



Boy did it create a firestorm in the comments section, after all, members of the far left liberal party cannot stomach the thought of American support inching upwards for our actions in Iraq. They cannot handle any news of success or progress in Iraq. They cannot even fathom the idea of success or victory.

They lose what little minds they have left over it.

Wellllllllllll, guess what? The poll was redone, and the results came out the same.

THE war in Iraq is the single most important continuing news issue right now. Public opinion about the war is a critical part of that story. That’s why when a finding about the war in a New York Times poll could not be easily explained, the paper went back and did another poll on the very same subject. It turns out the poll had gotten it right. Support for the initial invasion of Iraq, as measured by a question The New York Times/CBS News Poll has asked since December 2003, increased modestly compared with two months ago.

[...]

Forty-two percent of those polled said the United States did the right thing, and 54 percent said the United States should have stayed out of Iraq. The last time the question was asked, in May, 35 percent said taking military action against Iraq was the right thing and 61 percent said the United States should have stayed out.

No doubt the NYT was praying for a different outcome but, alas, their prayers went unanswered. In fact, the only numbers that changed was LESS, in the second poll, said we should have stayed out of Iraq.

When the second round of results came back, the numbers were nearly identical to the ones found in the poll about Mrs. Clinton. In the poll conducted last weekend with 889 adults, 42 percent of the respondents said the United States did the right thing in taking military action against Iraq, and 51 percent said the United States should have stayed out.

No mistake. American support for the war is increasing.

Deal with it.

More and more good news is coming out every single day, we show it to you consistently throughout the week, every week.

The American people see it too.

There was also a drop in the number of people who said the war was going badly. In the latest poll, 66 percent of Americans said things were going badly for the United States in its efforts to bring stability and order to Iraq. That is down from 76 percent who said the same thing in May.

Looks like some Americans are still capable of acknowledging the truth when it hits them in the face, or in this case, when they media starts showing some progress and success, instead of sweeping it under the rug.

The good news about Iraq, just got a little bit better. Thanks NYT!!!!

Cross Posted from Wake up America.

Sphere: Related Content