Among my favorite Roberts nomination op-eds is one I read today by Raymond J. Keating, chief economist for the Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council.
Here's part of what Keating says:
Is it any wonder Schumer will oppose Roberts, someone he fears may turn out to be another Scalia.New York's senior senator portrays himself as moderation's great defender. In a 2003 letter Schumer arrogantly advised Bush on how to pick a Supreme Court justice: "I start by encouraging you to use the same principles that guide me in evaluating judicial nominees. I consider three criteria: excellence, diversity and moderation."
Speaking in California last week, according to The Associated Press, Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia made an excellent point: "Now the Senate is looking for moderate judges, mainstream judges. What in the world is a moderate interpretation of a constitutional text? Halfway between what it says and what we'd like it to say?"
None of us like people who call attention to our arrogance and ignorance.
Keating's entire op-ed is here.
Hat Tip: Realclearpolitics.com
1 comments:
I recently posted a piece on my site, about why the Sunnis have really stood opposed to the new constitution in Iraq, with its call for Shiite clerics to step into the role of clerics. A reader commented on the parallel with the Democratic fight to keep the courts liberal. He had a point. All cultural differences aside, whta each case has in common is the desparation of a last stand.
Sunni's, with a minority have lost almost all power and privilege. They had surely hoped to use their monopoly on educated lawyers to hold onto the judiciary. Likewise the Democrats, having lost control of the congress and the presidency over the last decade are seeking to hold the line by keeping the judiciary here liberal or at least moderate.
Post a Comment