Kaye Grogan
Qualifications for U.S. Supreme Court nominees . . . secondary to Democrats
By Kaye Grogan
If President Bush picked Jesus Christ for the U.S. Supreme Court, the liberals would crucify him again. It is obvious no matter who the president selects to fill vacant spots on the high court there will be many who will insist they are not qualified, even if the nominees are overqualified. And since no one is perfect (except in their own eyes) the nay-sayers will press on intentionally trying to discredit everything and everybody associated with the Bush administration.
HA . . . as if they could do better!
The liberals want justices legislating from the bench, who will make their own laws favoring their way-out agenda, while the conservatives want justices who will interpret the laws correctly and rule accordingly. And betwixt the two — common ground will never be reached.
Not only do I find it appalling that Harriet Miers has been attacked by the anti-Christian folks — I take it as a personal attack on all Christians. The anti-Christian groups are "infringing" upon the
rights of Christians to worship freely. This is a "blatant" disregard of Amendment I of the "Bill of Rights" where it states that Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. It is also up to congress to protect the religious rights of Americans — but the silence is deafening in the "halls of Congress" as they avoid confronting the abuse of Christians at the hands of the "godless" folks.
Let's "dissect" in laymen's terms what religious freedom means: (1) Congress cannot establish a mandatory religion and force it upon the citizens. (2) People of faith have a right to worship freely and openly without any restrictions. (3) It is up to the leaders to see that these inalienable rights are not infringed upon.
I find it amusing that the anti-God folks are still using the feeble excuse to take "under God" out of the "Pledge of Allegiance" making the ridiculous argument that saying God in the pledge establishes a religion by the government. Now, most of us know that these troublemakers know better, they are just trying to get rid of what they view as hindrances — so they can be bad little boys and girls.
If the little "fly on the wall" at the meeting of the Democrats could talk, it might say: "many of the Democrats are supporting Harriet Miers, because her nomination is sparking a belligerent attitude toward President Bush by many of the Republican conservatives, particularly the Christian Republicans. Besides, since when has the Democrats supported anything the Bush administration has proposed?" Wise fly I would say — now if only it could actually talk.
No matter what President Bush does the anti-Bush activists are geared up in their determination to try and make him appear in a bad light. In a memo to Condoleezza Rice where he jotted down that he may have to go to the bathroom during a meeting — a big deal was made about this. This is pathetic! And no matter what he did during the hurricane disasters — he was ridiculed. If he didn't jet down to New Orleans, every day he was thoughtless and ignoring the citizens, because many are black and poor. If he went to New Orleans, he was just grandstanding for photo opts. This reminds me of a bad comedy routine orchestrated by the Democrats.
Everything that President Bush says in his speeches, Senator (D) Dick Durbin is waiting to rant and rave about what he (intentionally) views as discrepancies or misleading untruths. God help us if Durbin was in control of something as serious as the Iraqi invasion or anything else of a substantive nature. Evidently, Durbin is oblivious to how his rants are publicly bringing into question his ability to be effective in any type of leadership. If his primary goal is to set himself up to run for president — he might consider retiring from the political arena instead.
It is painstakingly obvious that the Democrats view abortion and other privacy rights much more important than the actual knowledge of the law a potential judicial nominee may possess.
Good grief . . . just give Harriet Miers an up or down vote — and be done with it!
And that's just my opinion!
© Kaye Grogan
If President Bush picked Jesus Christ for the U.S. Supreme Court, the liberals would crucify him again. It is obvious no matter who the president selects to fill vacant spots on the high court there will be many who will insist they are not qualified, even if the nominees are overqualified. And since no one is perfect (except in their own eyes) the nay-sayers will press on intentionally trying to discredit everything and everybody associated with the Bush administration.
HA . . . as if they could do better!
The liberals want justices legislating from the bench, who will make their own laws favoring their way-out agenda, while the conservatives want justices who will interpret the laws correctly and rule accordingly. And betwixt the two — common ground will never be reached.
Not only do I find it appalling that Harriet Miers has been attacked by the anti-Christian folks — I take it as a personal attack on all Christians. The anti-Christian groups are "infringing" upon the
rights of Christians to worship freely. This is a "blatant" disregard of Amendment I of the "Bill of Rights" where it states that Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. It is also up to congress to protect the religious rights of Americans — but the silence is deafening in the "halls of Congress" as they avoid confronting the abuse of Christians at the hands of the "godless" folks.
Let's "dissect" in laymen's terms what religious freedom means: (1) Congress cannot establish a mandatory religion and force it upon the citizens. (2) People of faith have a right to worship freely and openly without any restrictions. (3) It is up to the leaders to see that these inalienable rights are not infringed upon.
I find it amusing that the anti-God folks are still using the feeble excuse to take "under God" out of the "Pledge of Allegiance" making the ridiculous argument that saying God in the pledge establishes a religion by the government. Now, most of us know that these troublemakers know better, they are just trying to get rid of what they view as hindrances — so they can be bad little boys and girls.
If the little "fly on the wall" at the meeting of the Democrats could talk, it might say: "many of the Democrats are supporting Harriet Miers, because her nomination is sparking a belligerent attitude toward President Bush by many of the Republican conservatives, particularly the Christian Republicans. Besides, since when has the Democrats supported anything the Bush administration has proposed?" Wise fly I would say — now if only it could actually talk.
No matter what President Bush does the anti-Bush activists are geared up in their determination to try and make him appear in a bad light. In a memo to Condoleezza Rice where he jotted down that he may have to go to the bathroom during a meeting — a big deal was made about this. This is pathetic! And no matter what he did during the hurricane disasters — he was ridiculed. If he didn't jet down to New Orleans, every day he was thoughtless and ignoring the citizens, because many are black and poor. If he went to New Orleans, he was just grandstanding for photo opts. This reminds me of a bad comedy routine orchestrated by the Democrats.
Everything that President Bush says in his speeches, Senator (D) Dick Durbin is waiting to rant and rave about what he (intentionally) views as discrepancies or misleading untruths. God help us if Durbin was in control of something as serious as the Iraqi invasion or anything else of a substantive nature. Evidently, Durbin is oblivious to how his rants are publicly bringing into question his ability to be effective in any type of leadership. If his primary goal is to set himself up to run for president — he might consider retiring from the political arena instead.
It is painstakingly obvious that the Democrats view abortion and other privacy rights much more important than the actual knowledge of the law a potential judicial nominee may possess.
Good grief . . . just give Harriet Miers an up or down vote — and be done with it!
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.)
