Kaye Grogan
Bring on the Goody's headache powders. . .for Judge Roberts
By Kaye Grogan
Just how much money does it take to buy a "Supreme Court Justice?" Now I know that money talks, and the more chatter — the bigger the wad, but spending millions of dollars to "impede" judicial nominations is the pits — even for liberals. Everyone sent to the senate deserves an up or down vote period.
As for President Bush being in the position to select replacements for judges on the U.S. Supreme Court, he earned that distinct privilege, when he was elected president twice. So, count to five dissidents, hold your noses, and then swallow your "Castor Oil."
The liberals want a judge who ignores the "rule of law" period. For anyone to interpret that the Constitution gives a woman, (any woman ) — the right to kill her unborn baby is beyond sick — it's pure evil.
I have read the Constitution thoroughly, and no where is there a provision that allows the slaughter of innocent babies . . . nowhere!
And the selfish lamenting "I was here first! ...and I have top priority over a little unborn baby's life" — is beyond the pits!
While Judge John G. Roberts is meeting with the Democrats on Capitol Hill, I don't know how he is able to lie down at night with all those knives sticking in his back. But if one looks at all the facts — who really knows how Judge Roberts feels inside about sensitive issues that will no doubt be visited again by the U.S. Supreme Court sometime in the near future?
The most telltale sign that Judge Roberts might be bad news for the liberals, is how certain groups are reacting to his selection as the front-runner to replace Justice Sandra Day O' Connor. When it only took approximately 12 minutes for the firestorm to start erupting over President Bush's honorable selection — this spoke volumes.
It is of the utmost importance that someone is appointed to fill the vacancy of Justice Sandra Day O' Connor who follows the "rule of law" as it is written. Personal feelings or agendas have no place in the judicial system.
The conservatives want a judge who would assist in overturning the atrocious Roe V. Wade errant decision that has promoted and allowed legalized murder under the guise of a woman's right to choose to have an abortion since 1973. Good for them! On the opposite end of the stick — groups like People for the American Way, Planned Parenthood, NOW, etc., fear the confirmation of Judge John Roberts, because he will (hopefully) interpret the Constitution as it is written, and not legislate from the bench.
Kudos... to President Bush for selecting a judge who seems to be level-headed and is well-educated when it comes to knowing how the judicial system works. I just hope Judge Roberts is not hiding his true colors like Justices O'Connor and David Souter. Both O' Connor and (especially) Souter have been big disappointments to those who believed they were of a more conservative nature.
Democrats insist that abortion will not be a "litmus" test in the confirmation of the next U.S. Supreme Court Judge. But we all know better . . . don't we? Every single person seeking confirmation to the highest court that has appeared before the Judicial Committee since abortion was legalized have been interrogated with abortion as the deciding factor.
So, if anyone believes the malarkey that abortion isn't the focal point at the confirmation hearings — well, you just have your head buried in the sand.
While Judge Roberts is respected and liked by both sides of the political aisle, this is probably going to change rapidly. In my opinion, the good judge is going to need a lot of Goody's "headache" powders in his pockets during his interrogation by a bunch of bloodsuckers. He is going to feel like he's been run over by a freight train, before, and after . . . all is said and done.
And that's just my opinion!
© Kaye Grogan
Just how much money does it take to buy a "Supreme Court Justice?" Now I know that money talks, and the more chatter — the bigger the wad, but spending millions of dollars to "impede" judicial nominations is the pits — even for liberals. Everyone sent to the senate deserves an up or down vote period.
As for President Bush being in the position to select replacements for judges on the U.S. Supreme Court, he earned that distinct privilege, when he was elected president twice. So, count to five dissidents, hold your noses, and then swallow your "Castor Oil."
The liberals want a judge who ignores the "rule of law" period. For anyone to interpret that the Constitution gives a woman, (any woman ) — the right to kill her unborn baby is beyond sick — it's pure evil.
I have read the Constitution thoroughly, and no where is there a provision that allows the slaughter of innocent babies . . . nowhere!
And the selfish lamenting "I was here first! ...and I have top priority over a little unborn baby's life" — is beyond the pits!
While Judge John G. Roberts is meeting with the Democrats on Capitol Hill, I don't know how he is able to lie down at night with all those knives sticking in his back. But if one looks at all the facts — who really knows how Judge Roberts feels inside about sensitive issues that will no doubt be visited again by the U.S. Supreme Court sometime in the near future?
The most telltale sign that Judge Roberts might be bad news for the liberals, is how certain groups are reacting to his selection as the front-runner to replace Justice Sandra Day O' Connor. When it only took approximately 12 minutes for the firestorm to start erupting over President Bush's honorable selection — this spoke volumes.
It is of the utmost importance that someone is appointed to fill the vacancy of Justice Sandra Day O' Connor who follows the "rule of law" as it is written. Personal feelings or agendas have no place in the judicial system.
The conservatives want a judge who would assist in overturning the atrocious Roe V. Wade errant decision that has promoted and allowed legalized murder under the guise of a woman's right to choose to have an abortion since 1973. Good for them! On the opposite end of the stick — groups like People for the American Way, Planned Parenthood, NOW, etc., fear the confirmation of Judge John Roberts, because he will (hopefully) interpret the Constitution as it is written, and not legislate from the bench.
Kudos... to President Bush for selecting a judge who seems to be level-headed and is well-educated when it comes to knowing how the judicial system works. I just hope Judge Roberts is not hiding his true colors like Justices O'Connor and David Souter. Both O' Connor and (especially) Souter have been big disappointments to those who believed they were of a more conservative nature.
Democrats insist that abortion will not be a "litmus" test in the confirmation of the next U.S. Supreme Court Judge. But we all know better . . . don't we? Every single person seeking confirmation to the highest court that has appeared before the Judicial Committee since abortion was legalized have been interrogated with abortion as the deciding factor.
So, if anyone believes the malarkey that abortion isn't the focal point at the confirmation hearings — well, you just have your head buried in the sand.
While Judge Roberts is respected and liked by both sides of the political aisle, this is probably going to change rapidly. In my opinion, the good judge is going to need a lot of Goody's "headache" powders in his pockets during his interrogation by a bunch of bloodsuckers. He is going to feel like he's been run over by a freight train, before, and after . . . all is said and done.
And that's just my opinion!
© Kaye Grogan
The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.
(See RenewAmerica's publishing standards.)
