I am announcing my official break with the national Democratic party.
I was never a party member. I have never declared my party at election time and I refused to vote for party candidates during the primaries, but in recent years I have voted Democratic and given them money – especially during the 2004 elections. But even that level of support has ended for me as of today.
The party died for me on Wednesday when the Senate Judiciary Committee’s senior Democrat, Patrick Leahy of Vermont, announced his endorsement of Judge John Roberts, shortly after leaving the White House where the 2nd vacancy in the Supreme Court was discussed with President Bush.
Leahy said:
[Judge John] Roberts “is a man of integrity,” said Leahy, who told Roberts over the telephone about his decision. “I can only take him at his word that he does not have an ideological agenda.”
John Roberts Picks Up Democratic Support
The problem is that Roberts refused to answer truthfully many of the questions during his confirmation hearing. For example:
“At least two other matters enjoy sacramental status. Sen. Diane Feinstein, D-Calif., asked Roberts — who had promised the committee to tell the truth, “so help me God” — whether he accepted the “absolute” separation of church and state and whether he would support giving special treatment to racial minorities.
Again, Roberts promised to follow the Constitution, which is why Feinstein undoubtedly will vote against his confirmation.”
The problem with Roberts
Basically Roberts is Scalia light. Someone who plans on ruling based on the 200 year old text of the Constitution rather than on the interpretation of those words as the court has done since judicial review – which by the way also isn’t in the Constitution – was invented.
Abortion isn’t in the text so women have no right to it. Separation of church and state isn’t in the text so it doesn’t exist either and so on.
Scalia’s Dissenting Rhetoric
The truthful answer he should have told Senator Feinstein was – No, but instead he side stepped the question with a vague answer.
So much for Roberts being a man of integrity with no agenda .
The only thing that could save my support for the Democrats would be that maybe Leahy worked out a deal – he gives up on Roberts and Bush nominates a less conservative woman for O’Connor’s spot.
Some how I doubt it.
Some would argue that the Democrats realized that the Roberts nomination was a done deal what with the GOP majority. It would seem that Leahy wanted to preserve what political capital the Dems have and hold off a fight until it really matters.
Bullcrap!
How important is the appointment of the Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court? Political and religious conservatives are frothing at the mouth to get Roberts on the court since they seem to think he will start putting the court back to where they think it should be – like “separate but equal” is ok and women *ARE* property of their husbands.
Face it, the Democrats got outplayed again by Rove and company and were handed their balls.
If principles don’t mean enough to them, to fight to the bitter end, then why should I vote for them or give them money?
I still don’t plan to declare a party but I do plan on supporting my local and state Democrats where it makes sense but my days of supporting the National party are over.
