A Traitor To His Party...
Call this inflammatory if you want, but Sen. McCain--a senator my partner and I share--has decided to turn his back on his party; on the very Constitution he swore to uphold.
http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/
MATTHEWS: But bottom line, would you vote for what’s called the “nuclear option,” to get rid of the filibuster rule on judgeships?
MCCAIN: No I will not.
MATTHEWS: You will stick with the party?
MCCAIN: No, I will vote against the nuclear option.
MATTHEWS: You will vote—
MCCAIN: Against the nuclear option.
MATTHEWS: Oh, you will?
MCCAIN: Yes.
The traitor in his own words. I am sorry for all those that believe that this sort of "bickering" is pointless, but you are wrong. Dead wrong. The Constitutional Option offered is a welcome change to put things right. It will place the Constitution back where it belongs--on top as the ultimate arbiter of the law. The president has the right to place his nominees on the bench, on his, etc., as long as the Constitution says he does.
This consistent obstruction by the Democrats, and now one conspicuous RINO with eyes on the prize in 2008, has to stop. It ends, and it ends now. This option is the first step in making sure it ends here.
And people like McCain cry that should this occur, they will not be able to exercise power back, likewise. Sen. McCain, you are not supposed to be using any sort of illegal power. And make no mistake, that is precisely what the filibuster being used on nominees is. It is illegal. My partner did an excellent job of pointing out the proper process. It is a simple one.
The president nominates someone. They go to committee. The committee grills the nominee, and decides whether or not they deserve a vote on the floor of the Senate. If they do deserve such, then the Senate votes. The liberals do not sit there like spoiled brats, and throw a fit on the floor of the Senate. They do not whine about the person's beliefs; it does not apply to the interpretation of the law, which these people are on record of having an excellent mind for such a job. But that is, ultimately, the one thing that scares liberals.
A justice on the federal bench that interprets the law as it stands.
Not one that will make law out of nothing. Not one that will even entertain the thought of using international law. They are afraid of the justice that looks at the law and all of it's precedents, and renders a decision. They want one that will legislate, through pure fiat, from the bench.
That is unacceptable. Not just for me, but for the nation. We have laws for a reason. We have a process by which we engage in to make laws. The judiciary does not have this power. We need more justices that see the law, know the law, and interpret the laws. The only way to do it, at this moment, is to invoke the Constitutional Option. Break that damned filibuster, and restore order and procedure to the Senate.
The next step once this is done--if the GOP has the backbone to pull it off--is to start holding the judges on the bench accountable. "Good Behaviour" is not precisely identified in the Constitution. But a nice example of not abiding by "good Behaviour" would be their decision regarding Campaign Finance Reform. It is still a violation of our First Amendment rights; the very rights of political speech our Founding Fathers believed in, and reinforced within the Constitution.
Regardless, if the GOP brings this to the floor and loses, then so be it. We get a list of names that we will do our utmost to oust them from office come reelection time. As of right now, McCain is on that list. Should he change his mind, and vote with the party, he gets a reprieve. But if he holds to his word, we will eject him from office so hard that there will be skidmarks where his ass hits the pavement. (Bye, Johnny. It was not nice knowing you.)
If they fail to do so, then get out there, hit the pavement, and find a replacement. Give them all the support you can, and let us finally ditch this status quo that could give a rip about America.
The Bunny ;)
Call this inflammatory if you want, but Sen. McCain--a senator my partner and I share--has decided to turn his back on his party; on the very Constitution he swore to uphold.
http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/
MATTHEWS: But bottom line, would you vote for what’s called the “nuclear option,” to get rid of the filibuster rule on judgeships?
MCCAIN: No I will not.
MATTHEWS: You will stick with the party?
MCCAIN: No, I will vote against the nuclear option.
MATTHEWS: You will vote—
MCCAIN: Against the nuclear option.
MATTHEWS: Oh, you will?
MCCAIN: Yes.
The traitor in his own words. I am sorry for all those that believe that this sort of "bickering" is pointless, but you are wrong. Dead wrong. The Constitutional Option offered is a welcome change to put things right. It will place the Constitution back where it belongs--on top as the ultimate arbiter of the law. The president has the right to place his nominees on the bench, on his, etc., as long as the Constitution says he does.
This consistent obstruction by the Democrats, and now one conspicuous RINO with eyes on the prize in 2008, has to stop. It ends, and it ends now. This option is the first step in making sure it ends here.
And people like McCain cry that should this occur, they will not be able to exercise power back, likewise. Sen. McCain, you are not supposed to be using any sort of illegal power. And make no mistake, that is precisely what the filibuster being used on nominees is. It is illegal. My partner did an excellent job of pointing out the proper process. It is a simple one.
The president nominates someone. They go to committee. The committee grills the nominee, and decides whether or not they deserve a vote on the floor of the Senate. If they do deserve such, then the Senate votes. The liberals do not sit there like spoiled brats, and throw a fit on the floor of the Senate. They do not whine about the person's beliefs; it does not apply to the interpretation of the law, which these people are on record of having an excellent mind for such a job. But that is, ultimately, the one thing that scares liberals.
A justice on the federal bench that interprets the law as it stands.
Not one that will make law out of nothing. Not one that will even entertain the thought of using international law. They are afraid of the justice that looks at the law and all of it's precedents, and renders a decision. They want one that will legislate, through pure fiat, from the bench.
That is unacceptable. Not just for me, but for the nation. We have laws for a reason. We have a process by which we engage in to make laws. The judiciary does not have this power. We need more justices that see the law, know the law, and interpret the laws. The only way to do it, at this moment, is to invoke the Constitutional Option. Break that damned filibuster, and restore order and procedure to the Senate.
The next step once this is done--if the GOP has the backbone to pull it off--is to start holding the judges on the bench accountable. "Good Behaviour" is not precisely identified in the Constitution. But a nice example of not abiding by "good Behaviour" would be their decision regarding Campaign Finance Reform. It is still a violation of our First Amendment rights; the very rights of political speech our Founding Fathers believed in, and reinforced within the Constitution.
Regardless, if the GOP brings this to the floor and loses, then so be it. We get a list of names that we will do our utmost to oust them from office come reelection time. As of right now, McCain is on that list. Should he change his mind, and vote with the party, he gets a reprieve. But if he holds to his word, we will eject him from office so hard that there will be skidmarks where his ass hits the pavement. (Bye, Johnny. It was not nice knowing you.)
If they fail to do so, then get out there, hit the pavement, and find a replacement. Give them all the support you can, and let us finally ditch this status quo that could give a rip about America.
The Bunny ;)
posted by Syd And Vaughn | 7:10 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home