Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tejek who wrote (206597)	10/15/2004 1:47:46 AM
From: Peter Dierks	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1572777

So the reason that these two brilliant jurists are not qualified is that they are conservative? You could not find even one critical thing to say about Miguel Estrada. In the entire body of his work, the only thing wrong with his is that he interprets the Constitution the way it was written and that he is minority. It sounds like Democrats want to keep the minorities on the reservation. If you go over there, you will be punished. The claim against Janice Rogers Brown is that she is conservative, and includes her opinions in her rulings. On those grounds the entire ninth circus court is unqualified. On the left coast anyone who is not off the scale left is conservative. That is a mortal sin. She was rated well by the national bar. And Charles Pickering was supported by ever major black leader in his state. His offense was he was white? So now we have it. The Daschle litmus test of extremism: If you are Hispanic and conservative you are extreme. If you are Black and conservative you are extreme. If you are White and conservative you are extreme. Someone is extreme, but is not the judicial appointees. It sounds like his extremism is going to allow him the opportunity to be an ex Senator. Face it. Democrats are trying to ensure that Bush cannot make Appellate Court appointments. Following the Constitution was ok for the last 200 plus years. Tom Daschle and his Democrat allies decided to throw out the Constitution and make up their own rules. No wonder they view judges that use the Constitution as a guideline as extreme. Democrats are extreme in their perversion of the Constitution. Constructionism is not a problematic political ideology. It is an honored tradition on the bar. The neoliberal re-interpretation of the Constitution is a problem. If you wish to legislate, then you need to be elected to the legislative branch. Judges who legislate from the branch are not reinterpretting the Constitution, they are violating it.