Tags: Betrayal | Historic | Proportions

A Betrayal of Historic Proportions

Thursday, 26 May 2005 12:00 AM

(Note also that Democrats didn't agree to vote

The milquetoast sham document recites that its 14 signatories were upholding the "traditions of the Senate," but they did precisely the opposite. The Constitution stipulates that

The 14 might as well have said, "We'll agree not to violate the Constitution on a measly three appointments, provided we expressly reserve our right to thwart the Constitution in every other case."

The signatories' promise to filibuster nominees only under "extraordinary circumstances" doesn't make this poison pill any easier to swallow. It is what we refer to in contract law as an illusory promise. Not only is "extraordinary circumstances" not defined; the next clause expressly gives the green light to each signatory to "use his or her own discretion and judgment in determining whether such circumstances exist."

Some incorrigibly naive conservatives say Democrats won't be able to get away with blocking "conservative" judges in the future, having agreed not to block Brown, Pryor and Owen, who everyone agrees are originalists and "conservatives." But Democrats can simply say that by agreeing not to block a vote on these three, they weren't conceding that the nominees weren't "extraordinary," but that they were an acceptable, short-term compromise in exchange for the right to block similarly conservative nominees in the future.

Even if Democrats would hold themselves to a consistent standard – which is laughable – they can always manufacture artificial reasons to oppose philosophically similar judges on ethical and other grounds. And there is evidence that some are in the process of digging dirt on prospective nominees at this very moment.

Now, what did the feckless seven Republicans give up by signing this agreement? Well, they formally sanctioned an unconstitutional practice – that of requiring a super-majority to confirm judicial nominees. They further emasculated the president's judicial appointment power by presumptuously suggesting that he consult with senators from both parties

Republicans have also bestowed upon Democrats a public relations victory by implying that it was the Republicans, not Democrats, who were breaking with historical precedent and violating the spirit of the Constitution. In short, Republicans had the moral and historical high ground and voluntarily surrendered it to a militant Democrat minority by tacitly agreeing to a false version of the facts and history.

Even worse, the agreement effectively disenfranchises the majority of the electorate on the most important domestic and social issues facing the nation and which drove many of them to the polls in November. Millions of voters cast their ballots for national candidates in reliance on their belief that these people would stand up for them in the culture war by working to rid the courts of activist judges.

This "compromise" deal is a gigantic slap in the face to these voters by an elite cadre of legislators who seem to care more about "collegiality" among their Senate colleagues than vindicating constitutional principles. Even assuming 14 out of 100 senators can establish comity, would you rather have 100 senators getting along wonderfully while selling constitutional principles down the river, or having these 100 at each others' throats while preserving the Constitution?

Besides, the feckless seven didn't sign this agreement to promote comity. They did so because they don't agree with the president's choice of judges or the majority's position that judicial filibusters are unconstitutional.

John McCain himself said the constitutional option should not be invoked because it would result in Democrat presidents, in the future, having their judicial nominees confirmed by a simple majority. Well, Senator, that's the way it's always been, but you have put your imprimatur on the Democrats' distorted version of facts and history. Truth be known, these seven GOP moderates agree with the Democrat extremists that mainstream conservatives are the extremists.

This compromise deal is a travesty for Republicans, for the nation and for the majority of voters, who had a right to expect that their chosen executive and legislative officials would begin to correct the egregious trend of the judiciary away from the Constitution and traditional values.

COPYRIGHT 2005 CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC.

104

© 2019 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

   
1Like our page
2Share
Pre-2008
(Note also that Democrats didn't agree to vote The milquetoast sham document recites that its 14 signatories were upholding the "traditions of the Senate," but they did precisely the opposite. The Constitution stipulates that The 14 might as well have said, "We'll...
Betrayal,Historic,Proportions
672
2005-00-26
Thursday, 26 May 2005 12:00 AM
Newsmax Media, Inc.
 

Newsmax, Moneynews, Newsmax Health, and Independent. American. are registered trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc. Newsmax TV, and Newsmax World are trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc.

NEWSMAX.COM
America's News Page
© Newsmax Media, Inc.
All Rights Reserved