The Democrats Posturing Was Right Though Their Position Is Unconstitutional

Everybody criticizes the Democrats for their pestering during the Samuel Alitto judicial confirmation. They should remember that according to politics any judicial appointee since Robert Bork goes by the ideal that “They have the right to be silent and anything they say can and will be used against them”. This means that the Senators have to trick them into saying something incriminating and most of the Senators realize they are not that tricky. Solution get up on a soap box and expound your objections to the appointee based on known if misconstrued evidence.

Every Senator takes an oath to oppose the enemies of the their interpretation of the Constitution and they can not do that by rubber stamping President appointees. It means the original intent. Since that did not work for Robert Bork, it gives me the impression that dishonesty is prized by the Senate in a Supreme Court appointee. Well back on the original topic. The Senators job is to discern if each appointee will support or oppose the Constitution. They are also to discern if the appointee is able to use reason and logical argument based on evidence to discern the original intent of the Constitution. That knocks out that argument in Roe v. Wade that basically goes that because children within their mother’s womb are not treated equally under the law and therefore they are not persons. Because they are not persons they do not deserve to be treated equally under the law. I can see why Justice Blackmun’s daughter was hired by Planned Parenthood. I wonder if his other two daughters received similar gifts of appreciation. Which brings me to the last point. An appointee must be an individual of good character unlike the Senators that we Americans insist on electing.

In short I support the Democrats actions for reasons I specified above. This is even though I am convinced they are enemies of the Constitution. I believe they are enemies because I can not see how you can insure the blessing of liberty for ourselves and our posterity as the Constitution requires while still advocating arbitrarily and deliberately killing that same posterity. I have trouble believing that the freedom the dead enjoy is the freedom the Constitution demands.