Today's Cultural Warfare Update
Jul. 21st, 2005 09:23 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
solarbirdLA Times report: Latest draft of Iraqi constitution puts women's rights under Islamic law; I cannot overstate how angry this makes me, and I restate that if - IF - this is what we get out of this war, President Bush should be impeached;
Very good blogger commentary on the LA Times report;
Man kills three year old toddler son over fears the child might be gay;
National Director of Priests for Life essay on why the party of the candidate matters more than the individual candidate - basically a continuation of the ongoing "all religious people must vote Republican" campaign, without quite mentioning parties;
The Weekly Standard isn't particularly fond of Supreme Court nominee Roberts;
Focus on the Family issues action item - write letters to the editor supporting John Roberts for Supreme Court, and yes, it includes another letter-writing "wizard" (ACTION ITEM);
Focus on the Family issues action item - write your Senators in support of John Roberts for Supreme Court. Also includes their endorsement and that of the Family Research Council (ACTION ITEM);
Focus on the Family calls Rove allegations a "pseudo-scandal";
Today's Family News in Focus;
Concerned Women for America endorse John Roberts for US Supreme Court;
CWA links to Baltimore Sun column laments the loss of a conservative woman's perspective;
Concerned Women for America action item supporting John Roberts (ACTION ITEM);
Family Research Council action item: thank President Bush for nomination of John Roberts (ACTION ITEM);
Traditional Values Coalition action item: thank President Bush for nomination of John Roberts (ACTION ITEM);
Traditional Values Coalition endorsement of John Roberts for Supreme Court;
Michelle Malkin endorses FBI monitoring of liberal groups - she's previously endorsed the WWII-era internment camps, so my surprise is, well, limited;
WorldNetDaily columnist: Roberts is no Scalia, and they're very disappointed in the mass sell-out over his nomination by "constitutional originalists and textualists";
Heritage Foundation endorses John Roberts.
----- 1 -----
THE CONFLICT IN IRAQ
Draft Constitution May Deal Setback to Rights of Women
Changes include loss of guaranteed seats in the assembly and erosion of their social status.
By Alissa J. Rubin, Times Staff Writer
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-sharia20jul20,1,3447235.story?coll=la-headlines-world&ctrack=1&cset=true
BAGHDAD — A draft version of the constitution would make fundamental changes in the legal rights of Iraqi women, undoing decades of progressive treatment and likely sharply reducing the number of women in the National Assembly.
Currently, women hold 31% of the seats in the National Assembly, and under the Transitional Administrative Law that set up the assembly, they must hold at least 25% of the seats.
However, the draft would remove the 25% requirement after two more terms of the assembly, almost certainly resulting in a significant reduction of seats held by women.
Women's rights would also be affected by language stating that women would have the same rights as men as long as there is no conflict with Islamic law.
Similar language on Islamic law is being added to every provision in the constitution after a push by Muslim clerics to emphasize Iraq's identity as an Islamic state.
That probably would mean a return to the practice, common in Persian Gulf nations, of having matters such as marriage, divorce and inheritance adjudicated by religious courts.
Under that system Sunnis, Shiites and Christians would have separate courts to deal with such matters.
Under Islamic law, daughters inherit a lesser share of their fathers' wealth than sons do, and divorce is easy for men, who can simply say three times that they divorce a woman to accomplish it. Women, on the other hand, must go through an elaborate and often embarrassing presentation of domestic circumstances with a cleric.
[More at URL]
----- 2 -----
Commentary on subjugation of women in latest Iraqi Constitution draft
Takari Risu
June 21, 2005
Source: http://www.livejournal.com/users/risu/532883.html [Highlighted because the post starts with a URL]
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-sharia20jul20,1,3447235.story?coll=la-headlines-world&ctrack=1&cset=true
Let me express my reaction like so.
There is a natural desire on the part of moralists to place preeminence on their own ideology. I am no exception.
Yet it is not within the provenance of government to take away that fundamental quality of personhood that chance, or God, or providence, or other power or powers unknown has chosen to bestow upon us.
Then let it be understood that the equal rights of women are not within the jurisdiction of religion to deny; not in Iraq and not in the States; for to do so is to lie about our fundamental personhood, to declare us less, and to do so not based on faith, love, or compassion, but based on arrogance.
[More at URL]
----- 3 -----
Father "killed toddler over gay fears", court hears
Larry Buhl, PlanetOut Network
Friday 15 July, 2005 12:37 | More from this date | Today's headlines
http://uk.gay.com/headlines/8787
A man has appeared in a US court accused of killing his baby son because of an irrational fear that he would become gay.
Ronnie Paris would shake, wet himself and vomit as his father forced him into a box and repeatedly slapped him on the head in an effort to prevent him from being gay, the child's mother, Nysheerah Paris, told the court Monday.
The boy was 3 years old when he died from swelling on both sides of the brain on January 28.
Others backed up the mother's testimony on the first day of the capital murder trial of Ronnie Paris Jr, 21, of Tampa, Florida. Paris is accused of physically abusing the toddler until the boy slipped into a coma.
"He was trying to teach him how to fight," the boy's aunt, Shanita Powell, told the court. "He was concerned that the child might be gay."
"He didn't want him to be a sissy," Shelton Bostic, the defendant's Bible-study friend, testified.
[More at URL]
----- 4 -----
The Party Matters
Fr. Frank Pavone
National Director, Priests for Life
http://www.priestsforlife.org/columns/columns2005/05-07-18thepartymatters.htm
When deciding on the candidate for whom you cast your vote in an election, a number of moral principles have to be considered. As I have often written in the past, the position of the candidate him/herself on the most important issues is of key importance, because by putting that person in a position to vote on legislation, you help to move public policy either closer or farther away from the moral law.
But that very consideration also means that the positions of the party to which the candidate belongs also matter. By putting that candidate in office, you also help to put his/her party into power. This has to be taken into consideration, too. Voters need to ask how much the election of a particular candidate will shift the balance of power between the parties, and what will happen when a particular party takes control. Voters should know the platform of the party and the official positions of party leadership on the same moral issues on which the individual candidate is evaluated.
At times, in all parties, the individual candidate will take a different position than his/her party on fundamental moral issues. Yet if the election of that candidate would shift control to his/her party, which holds the opposite position on those issues, a vote for that candidate, in effect, works against the position the voter may be trying to advance.
In short, the party matters.
[More at URL]
----- 5 -----
The Safe Pick
Conservatives hoped for a demonstrably conservative nominee with a streak of daring. They didn't get one.
by Fred Barnes
07/19/2005 11:39:00 PM
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/005/854zcwhn.asp
PRESIDENT BUSH kept his promise in nominating John Roberts, a federal appeals court judge, to replace Justice Sandra Day O'Connor the Supreme Court. Since Bush first announced for the presidency in 1999, he has vowed to name judicial conservatives who will interpret the law rather than legislate from the bench and fabricate new rights. Roberts, the president's first Supreme Court pick, qualifies as a judicial conservative, or as Republican Sen. John Cornyn called him, "a mainstream traditionalist." His confirmation will nudge the court to the right. And confirmation appears highly likely.
But there's more to the Roberts choice than that. In choosing among judicial conservatives, there are safe picks and risky picks. With Roberts, Bush took the safe route. Related to this, there are cautious judicial conservatives and bold judicial conservatives. The president tilted to the cautious side in naming Roberts.
How safe was the pick? The answer is very. This is partly because of his impressive credentials as a brilliant legal scholar and man of solid temperament and character. More important, he's already been tested in the Senate and passed muster. In 2003, his nomination to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia sailed through the Senate Judiciary Committee on a 16-3 vote. He cleared the full Senate on a voice vote. If you are committed to choosing a genuine judicial conservative, it doesn't get much safer than Roberts.
Bush had the opportunity to take a riskier approach. His list of possible nominees included a number of federal judges who would have faced truculent opposition by most Senate Democrats and by the liberal groups allied with them. These included Judges Michael Luttig of the 4th U.S. Court of Appeals and Edith Jones of the 5th. Confirmation of either would have been difficult and involved a nasty and bitter clash between Republicans and Democrats. Still, they'd likely have been confirmed. The hearings and debate on Roberts are expected to be kinder and gentler.
More than any decision in Bush's second term, conservatives around the country have been focused on what he'd do when faced with a Supreme Court vacancy. Their hope was for a demonstrably conservative nominee with a streak of daring. In Roberts, they didn't get one, at least from all appearances. He's an establishment conservative, respected as a private attorney and admired as a judge. Audacious he is not. On the other hand, there's little concern that he might drift sharply to the left as Justice David Souter, nominated by the elder President Bush, has.
[More at URL]
----- 6 -----
Send a Letter to the Editor Supporting Judge John Roberts
Focus on the Family
Editor's Note
[Received in email; no URL]
President Bush has nominated federal appeals court Judge
John Roberts to the U.S. Supreme Court -- a choice hailed
by Focus on the Family Action Chairman James C. Dobson,
Ph.D.
"Judge Roberts is an unquestionably qualified attorney and
judge with impressive experience in the government and the
private sector," Dobson said. "He has demonstrated at
every stop on his career path the legal acumen, judicial
temperament and personal integrity necessary to be a
Supreme Court justice."
But liberal pressure groups are already mobilizing to
upend Roberts' nomination, hoping to convince Americans he
is not suitable to serve. You can play a key role in
thwarting their plans -- by sending a letter to the editor
of your local newspaper stressing Roberts' solid
qualifications and character.
We've made it easy for you to put one together by
gathering a series of points you can use to make a
compelling argument in favor of Judge Roberts receiving a
fair Senate confirmation hearing and an up-or-down vote on
his nomination. You can have a publishable letter ready
in just a few minutes by visiting the link below.
http://www.family.org/cforum/extras/a0037257.cfm
----- 7 -----
Roberts: A Man of Character
by Pete Winn, associate editor
Focus on the Family
Citizenlink Breaking News
SUMMARY: The president's nominee is described as a man of
"extraordinary accomplishment."
[Received in email; no URL]
President Bush on Tuesday tapped Judge John Roberts to
become the nation's 109th Supreme Court justice,
introducing him to the nation in prime time. Today, the
confirmation process got under way with Roberts having
coffee at the White House.
"I just had a cup of coffee with the nominee and told him
I thought things were off to a very good start for his
nomination," Bush told reporters. "I'm not surprised --
he's highly qualified for the job. He's the kind of person
that will bring great dignity to the Court. Judge Roberts
is off to the Senate this morning to begin his
consultations. I'm confident the senators will come to
realize what I've come to realize: We're lucky to have a
man of such wisdom and intellectual strength willing to
serve our country."
Bush's comments this morning parallel what he said in
presenting his nominee Tuesday evening. The president
called Roberts "a man of extraordinary accomplishment and
ability" -- adding that the prominent attorney and judge
"has a good heart."
"He has the qualities Americans expect in a judge," Bush
said, "experience, wisdom, fairness, and civility. He has
profound respect for the rule of law and for the liberties
guaranteed to every citizen. He will strictly apply the
Constitution and laws, not legislate from the bench."
But the president didn't just talk about Roberts' judicial
philosophy. He also talked about Roberts' family.
"He's also a man of character who loves his country and
his family," the president told America. "I'm pleased that
his wife, Jane, and his two beautiful children, Jack and
Josie, could be with us tonight. Judge Roberts has served
his fellow citizens well, and he is prepared for even
greater service."
Former Indiana Republican Congressman David McIntosh
agreed. He said he has known Roberts from the days when
they served together in the Justice Department during the
first Bush administration. He described Roberts as a
down-to-earth man with a good sense of humor -- and
someone fellow Hoosiers are proud of.
"John is a tremendous guy, a very bright intelligent
lawyer," McIntosh said. "I have a great deal of admiration
for him. He's genuinely humble, he can poke fun at
himself, as well as the situations he's in. And he's a
very strong family man."
McIntosh said Roberts grew up in Long Beach, Ind., not far
from Lake Michigan. His dad worked at Bethlehem Steel's
Michigan City plant -- where the nominee also found work
during college.
The product of parochial schools, Roberts described
himself as a "slow-footed" halfback who was chosen as
captain of his high school football team. He was also on
the wrestling team and graduated first in his class.
"I know that John is a man of strong faith," McIntosh told
CitizenLink. "I know he cares about his family, but most
important for this job, he loves the Constitution of the
United States, and he doesn't believe judges should impose
their political opinion, but they should be faithful to
that."
Pro-family leaders today told reporters that even though
we don't know everything there is to know about the
nominee, what we do know speaks well of him.
Focus on the Family Action Chairman James C. Dobson,
Ph.D., said Roberts is clearly not a David Souter -- a
reference to a current Supreme Court justice who was
nominated by the elder President Bush in the 1980s. Souter
was expected to be a strong conservative, but has proven
to be one of the most liberal of the justices sitting on
the court. No one knew the truth about Souter's positions
during his confirmation, Dobson said.
"I think we do know a lot about Judge Roberts," Dobson
said, "from his life, from his record, from the things
that he has stood for, and we feel much more comfortable
with this nomination than we would have with Justice
Souter."
Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council,
said conservatives know what they are looking for in a
justice.
"We're looking for a judge who understands that the role
of crafting public policy is in the hands of the
legislative branch," Perkins said, "and Judge Roberts does
have that track record, both in terms of his opinions and
his briefings. He has shown judicial restraint and that
policy matters are better decided by the elected
representatives."
Robert George, McCormick professor of jurisprudence and
politics at Princeton University, told reporters that
conservatives may not like Roberts' every decision. But
that's not the point.
"There is no guarantee with an originalist or a
constitutionalist judge that that judge will always rule
on the conservative side in a political debate. Nor should
there be any guarantee," he said. "The task of the judge
is not to give victories to liberals or conservatives --
but to faithfully apply the Constitution and its norms."
McIntosh said Roberts, in the end, is a good man -- not a
perfect man -- but a good man.
"You can bet a lot of money that these radical groups in
Washington are combing through everything he might have
said or written or whispered trying to find out, 'Is there
a secret side to this person?' My guess is that they won't
find anything. In the past, I've seen them make up things
about people, like Clarence Thomas. But, Lord willing, I
think the Senate is prepared to be fair and hear out the
arguments. But he's a strong man -- and a strong man of
character."
TAKE ACTION: Encourage your senators to give Roberts a
fair hearing and an up-or-down vote. You can reach them
through the CitizenLink Action Center:
http://www3.capwiz.com/fof/mail/oneclick_compose/?alertid=7855151
----- 8 -----
Rove Allegations Called a 'Pseudo Scandal'
by Bill Wilson, Washington, D.C., correspondent
Focus on the Family
SUMMARY: Observers say it's an attempt by liberals and the
media to discredit Bush.
http://www.family.org/cforum/fnif/news/a0037225.cfm
Did he or didn't he break the law? The truth about Karl
Rove's alleged outing of a CIA agent is clouded by both
the news media's circus coverage and a thirst by liberals
to discredit the Bush administration.
White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan continuously
faces persistent questions about the investigation of the
senior advisor to the president, and he repeats the same
answer.
"Some of you asked a couple of questions about: Does the
President still have confidence in particular individuals,
specifically Karl Rove," he said at a recent press
conference. "I don't want to get into commenting on things
in the context of an ongoing investigation."
American Values President Gary Bauer said the insider's
take in Washington is that this is less about Rove's guilt
or innocence and more about an overall strategy to
discredit the administration.
[More at URL]
----- 9 -----
Family News in Focus
Thursday, July 21, 2005
Focus on the Family
http://www.oneplace.com/Ministries/Family_News_in_Focus/
* Will John Roberts’ faith become an issue in his confirmation hearings for High Court? Some fear liberals will attack him because he’s a devout Christian
1. "Democrats by and large are taking a wait and see approach" on Roberts. Conservatives claim "Catholic faith will be used against him." Whine, whine, whine. Attacking Senator Leihi as likely to attack on the basis of religion, trying to paint him as anti-Catholic and anti-religious. "Republicans... are equally alert to the possibility of faith being an issue." "The question now becomes: do we trust the process?"
* FDA is warning doctors about deadly side effects to women who use the abortion pill – RU 486
2. "Bringing the death toll to 10 in the US and Europe." FDA telling doctors to be on the lookout for a particular kind of infection. Fundamentalists talk about "many groups" (them) complaining about RU486 for years. Christian Medical Association compares RU-486 to starving a human being to death. (Seriously.) Says no warning label should be good enough because it's still an abortifactant.
* New push to get cable subscribers a voice in what kind of programming they get
3. Several "pro-family" groups are trying to get ala carte programming - the ability to buy individual channels. Concerned Women for America has this as a big hobby-horse. Claims 67% of Americans polled support ala carte programming. "Why should people have to pay for channels that they don't want to watch?" Admits that ala carte programming would end up raising rates for all cable customers, but specifically say that's okay.
* Each year Congress tries, and fails, to repeal the “Mexico City” policy prohibiting U.S. funding of abortions overseas - Another attempt is coming
5. Foreign Operation Appropriations Bill will be vetoed if it overturns Mexico City, which bans any funding for groups that provide abortion services, independent of whether the money is spent for abortions. Note that this is the exact opposite of their position on funding religious organisations.
* Think tank says the black family is failing and it’s time to promote Christian vision for marriage
4. "Blacks are marrying less, and 70% of black children are born to unwed mothers." "It's time to get the black church front and centre in promoting traditional marriage." Pushes "God's Gift: A Christian Vision for Marriage in the Black Family."
* After 24 years, Florida Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen wants a debt settled – She’s introduced bill that would allow survivors of 1970’s Iranian hostage crisis to sue for damages
6. Algers Accord prevents suing; bill changes US law to allow lawsuits.
----- 10 -----
President Bush Nominates Judge John G. Roberts to the U.S. Supreme Court!
"He fulfills the President's promise," says CWA's Chief Counsel Jan LaRue. "We're thrilled!"
Concerned Women for America
Statement from Mrs. Beverly LaHaye, Founder and Chairman of CWA
Linked to from main page at http://www.cwfa.org/main.asp
I’m thrilled with the president’s nomination of John G. Roberts as associate justice of the Supreme Court. Every indication suggests that Judge Roberts meets the key test of the president’s own promise to nominate someone like Justice Scalia or Justice Thomas. Judge Roberts respects the Constitution as a document that says what it means – not more, not less. His extensive experience shows that he is well equipped to resist the temptation to substitute the actual words of the Constitution with his own whim. It’s clear to me that the president has earned the praise he is receiving for his choice and I join in applauding President Bush for his decisive and well-considered selection. Liberal Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee, spurred on by their leftist abortion lobby, will do all that they can to attack Judge Roberts but they will fail. Concerned Women for America will do all in our power to support him all the way to confirmation.
Mrs.Beverly LaHaye,
Founder and Chairman
Concerned Women for America
----- 11 -----
Critics lament loss of woman's perspective
Some question wisdom of putting another white male on high court
By Stephanie Desmon
Sun Staff
Originally published July 21, 2005
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/nationworld/bal-te.diversity21jul21,1,7700310.story?coll=bal-news-nation&ctrack=1&cset=true
Retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor praised Judge John G. Roberts Jr. to a reporter in Idaho soon after his selection as the president's choice to fill her seat on the Supreme Court was made public, noting, "He's good in every way, except he's not a woman."
To many women, the sight of another white male receiving a lifetime appointment to the most influential court in the nation sends an upsetting message: Despite huge gains in the legal profession, where women make up 30 percent of the bar and more than 50 percent of law school classes, there are still limits, many said.
"The face of yet another privileged white male who went to Harvard is, to me, a slap in the face to women in America," said Karen O'Connor, a professor of government at American University and director of its Women Politics Institute. "If everyone on that court looks the same, they begin to speak in one voice because they've had the same life experiences."
The experiences of men and women in this country, O'Connor and others said, are not the same. A woman's perspective might be shaped by things many men never grapple with, be it gender discrimination or reproductive rights or simply what it means to go through life as a woman. The loss of a female voice could mean the loss of something a man just can't bring to the discussion, whatever that might be in any given case, several said.
"We live in a different world than men, so our responses are going to be different," said Lisa A. Gladden, an assistant public defender in Baltimore and a state senator. "We are moving in a direction of equality. We're not there yet. ...
"We don't want just a whole bunch of suits with pants. We need two skirts in there, three skirts, four. Half the bench should be women. One woman is a token. Two women is a contribution."
[More at URL]
----- 12 -----
CWA Applauds Supreme Court Choice
Concerned Women for America
7/20/2005
By Seana Cranston
Express your support to the White House and your senators!
http://www.cwfa.org/articles/8579/LEGAL/scourt/index.htm
Concerned Women for America and citizens across the country rejoice today upon President Bush’s nomination of Judge John Roberts to the United States Supreme Court. The President has indeed proven himself a man of his word. He has nominated a jurist of integrity, a family man of faith, who will faithfully interpret the Constitution, rather than legislate from the bench.
Judge Roberts has extensive legal experience and an outstanding background within the conservative legal community. He graduated magna cum laude from Harvard University Law School, where he served as an editor of the Harvard Law Review. Upon graduation from law school, Roberts clerked first for Judge Henry Friendly of the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, and then for Chief Justice William Rehnquist at the U.S. Supreme Court.
He also served as Associate Counsel to President Ronald Reagan and as Principal Deputy Solicitor General in the first Bush administration. Remarkably, Roberts has argued a record 39 cases before the U.S. Supreme Court. In June of 2003, President George W. Bush elevated Roberts to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
In testimony to Judge Roberts’ character and outstanding reputation, newspaper and media outlets around the country have published words of praise for him:
[More at URL, including action item to call or write the White House and your senators in support]
----- 13 -----
Thank President Bush for Nominating Judge Roberts
July 20, 2005 - Wednesday
Forward to a Friend!
http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=AL05G10
Last night President Bush announced his choice of Judge John G. Roberts to fill the vacancy on the U.S. Supreme Court created by the retirement of Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. The President has selected a jurist who is intellectually powerful, committed to the rule of law, steeped in character, and determined not to legislate from the bench. During his time on the national political stage, President Bush has said he would nominate to the Supreme Court individuals who reflect the judicial philosophy of the justices he most admires, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas.
By picking John G. Roberts, the President has been true to his word. Join us in sending a message of thanks to President Bush for making this strong nomination. Judge Roberts now embarks on a confirmation process that should be fair, thorough and swift. He is entitled to an up or down vote, and the American people are entitled to have a full complement of nine justices ready to work when the Supreme Court convenes for its fall session on October 3, 2005. Tell President Bush you will stand by him and urge the Senate to complete its "advise and consent" role promptly.
----- 14 -----
SUPREME COURT NOMINEE TAKE ACTION CENTER
Traditional Values Coalition
http://www.traditionalvalues.org/modules.php?sid=2353
July 21, 2005 – Supreme Court nominee Judge John Roberts deserves our support to be confirmed by an up or down vote in the full Senate. The character assassins are already out in full force trying to destroy his chances of confirmation.
President Bush deserves our thanks. We urge you to send a letter of support for Judge John Roberts to President Bush by using TVC’s CapWiz service: http://capwiz.com/traditional/mail/oneclick_compose/?alertid=7857811
The pre-written letter to President Bush on Judge John Roberts says:
Dear President Bush:
I want to express my sincere thanks to you for choosing Judge John Roberts to become our next Supreme Court Justice.
Judge Roberts is the perfect choice to replace Justice O’Connor. As you have stated, he is wise, fair, and will interpret the law, not legislate from the bench.
Your choice of Judge Roberts is one of historic proportions and will do much to restore confidence on our nation’s federal court system. Liberal activists on the federal bench have done much damage to our nation and to the confidence of most Americans in the fairness of the judicial system.
Thank you so much. Please know that I will be actively supporting him during the confirmation process. You are both in my prayers.
Sincerely,
----- 15 -----
TVC Pleased With President Bush’s Supreme Court Pick!
For Immediate Release July 20, 2005
Contact: Amy Skeen (202) 547-8570
http://www.traditionalvalues.org/modules.php?sid=2352
Washington, DC – “President Bush is to be applauded for his choice of Judge John Roberts to replace Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor on the Court,” said Traditional Values Coalition Chairman, Rev. Louis P. Sheldon. We fully concur with President Bush when he said, ‘when a President chooses a Justice, he's placing in human hands the authority and majesty of the law.’
----- 16 -----
Why the FBI watches the left
Michelle Malkin
Posted: July 20, 2005
1:00 a.m. Eastern
© 2005 Creators Syndicate Inc.
http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=45357
Oh, dear. Oh, dear. Civil-liberties activists, anti-war organizers, eco-militants and animal-rights operatives are in a fright over news that the nefarious FBI is watching them. Why on earth would the government be worried about harmless liberal grannies, innocent vegetarians, unassuming rainforest lovers and other "peaceful groups" simply exercising their First Amendment rights?
Let me remind you of some very good reasons.
[More at URL]
----- 17 -----
John Roberts is no Scalia
Posted: July 21, 2005
1:00 a.m. Eastern
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=45379
© 2005 Creators Syndicate Inc.
On Tuesday evening, President Bush nominated Judge John G. Roberts Jr. to the Supreme Court of the United States. "He will strictly apply the Constitution and laws, not legislate from the bench," Bush stated of Roberts. Conservatives immediately leapt on the Roberts bandwagon, echoing Bush's sentiments. Talk-radio commentator Hugh Hewitt labeled Roberts "a home run." The Heritage Foundation's legal experts cited Roberts' "proven fidelity to the Constitution and the rule of law" in backing his nomination. Bill Kristol of The Weekly Standard called Roberts "a quality pick."
Perhaps Roberts is a safe pick. He's politically conservative and undoubtedly brilliant. He will sail through the Senate without much hassle. But it is shocking to watch many constitutional originalists and textualists abandon their philosophies in favor of cheap politics.
[More at URL]
----- 18 -----
Heritage Foundation Legal Experts Laud Bush's Choice for High Court
The Heritage Foundation
http://www.heritage.org/Press/NewsReleases/nr071905a.cfm
WASHINGTON, JULY 19, 2005--The Heritage Foundation's Center for Legal and Judicial Studies, Chairman Edwin Meese III, Director Todd Gaziano and Senior Legal Fellow Paul Rosenzweig, tonight issued the following statement on John G. Roberts, President Bush's new Supreme Court nominee:
"President Bush promised the American people that he would nominate Supreme Court justices who would not legislate from the bench and would be in the mold of Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia.
"He has fulfilled that promise tonight, with the selection of a judge of unquestionable integrity and proven fidelity to the Constitution and the rule of law.
"In addition, John Roberts brings a wealth of valuable experience beyond his years on the bench that will be helpful to the Supreme Court's deliberations. Indeed, Roberts's life experiences make him a uniquely well-qualified nominee for the high court.
"As a former principal deputy solicitor general, associate White House counsel and other positions spanning two administrations, Roberts has a keen knowledge of the government and the federal justice system. As a distinguished private practitioner and Supreme Court advocate, Roberts also understands how the law affects the lives of ordinary Americans and our productive enterprises.
"We are proud to have worked with him during his time in government and when he was a private practitioner at Hogan & Hartson. We are confident his service on the Supreme Court will be a distinguished one that will make all Americans proud.
"The president has done his duty with great care and promptness. Now, it's the Senate's turn. The American people will rightly demand that senators conduct themselves expeditiously and with civility as they carry out their constitutional 'advice and consent' responsibilities.
"We are confident that they will do so to allow the new justice to take his seat on the bench by the first Monday of October."
Very good blogger commentary on the LA Times report;
Man kills three year old toddler son over fears the child might be gay;
National Director of Priests for Life essay on why the party of the candidate matters more than the individual candidate - basically a continuation of the ongoing "all religious people must vote Republican" campaign, without quite mentioning parties;
The Weekly Standard isn't particularly fond of Supreme Court nominee Roberts;
Focus on the Family issues action item - write letters to the editor supporting John Roberts for Supreme Court, and yes, it includes another letter-writing "wizard" (ACTION ITEM);
Focus on the Family issues action item - write your Senators in support of John Roberts for Supreme Court. Also includes their endorsement and that of the Family Research Council (ACTION ITEM);
Focus on the Family calls Rove allegations a "pseudo-scandal";
Today's Family News in Focus;
Concerned Women for America endorse John Roberts for US Supreme Court;
CWA links to Baltimore Sun column laments the loss of a conservative woman's perspective;
Concerned Women for America action item supporting John Roberts (ACTION ITEM);
Family Research Council action item: thank President Bush for nomination of John Roberts (ACTION ITEM);
Traditional Values Coalition action item: thank President Bush for nomination of John Roberts (ACTION ITEM);
Traditional Values Coalition endorsement of John Roberts for Supreme Court;
Michelle Malkin endorses FBI monitoring of liberal groups - she's previously endorsed the WWII-era internment camps, so my surprise is, well, limited;
WorldNetDaily columnist: Roberts is no Scalia, and they're very disappointed in the mass sell-out over his nomination by "constitutional originalists and textualists";
Heritage Foundation endorses John Roberts.
----- 1 -----
THE CONFLICT IN IRAQ
Draft Constitution May Deal Setback to Rights of Women
Changes include loss of guaranteed seats in the assembly and erosion of their social status.
By Alissa J. Rubin, Times Staff Writer
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-sharia20jul20,1,3447235.story?coll=la-headlines-world&ctrack=1&cset=true
BAGHDAD — A draft version of the constitution would make fundamental changes in the legal rights of Iraqi women, undoing decades of progressive treatment and likely sharply reducing the number of women in the National Assembly.
Currently, women hold 31% of the seats in the National Assembly, and under the Transitional Administrative Law that set up the assembly, they must hold at least 25% of the seats.
However, the draft would remove the 25% requirement after two more terms of the assembly, almost certainly resulting in a significant reduction of seats held by women.
Women's rights would also be affected by language stating that women would have the same rights as men as long as there is no conflict with Islamic law.
Similar language on Islamic law is being added to every provision in the constitution after a push by Muslim clerics to emphasize Iraq's identity as an Islamic state.
That probably would mean a return to the practice, common in Persian Gulf nations, of having matters such as marriage, divorce and inheritance adjudicated by religious courts.
Under that system Sunnis, Shiites and Christians would have separate courts to deal with such matters.
Under Islamic law, daughters inherit a lesser share of their fathers' wealth than sons do, and divorce is easy for men, who can simply say three times that they divorce a woman to accomplish it. Women, on the other hand, must go through an elaborate and often embarrassing presentation of domestic circumstances with a cleric.
[More at URL]
----- 2 -----
Commentary on subjugation of women in latest Iraqi Constitution draft
Takari Risu
June 21, 2005
Source: http://www.livejournal.com/users/risu/532883.html [Highlighted because the post starts with a URL]
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-sharia20jul20,1,3447235.story?coll=la-headlines-world&ctrack=1&cset=true
Let me express my reaction like so.
There is a natural desire on the part of moralists to place preeminence on their own ideology. I am no exception.
Yet it is not within the provenance of government to take away that fundamental quality of personhood that chance, or God, or providence, or other power or powers unknown has chosen to bestow upon us.
Then let it be understood that the equal rights of women are not within the jurisdiction of religion to deny; not in Iraq and not in the States; for to do so is to lie about our fundamental personhood, to declare us less, and to do so not based on faith, love, or compassion, but based on arrogance.
[More at URL]
----- 3 -----
Father "killed toddler over gay fears", court hears
Larry Buhl, PlanetOut Network
Friday 15 July, 2005 12:37 | More from this date | Today's headlines
http://uk.gay.com/headlines/8787
A man has appeared in a US court accused of killing his baby son because of an irrational fear that he would become gay.
Ronnie Paris would shake, wet himself and vomit as his father forced him into a box and repeatedly slapped him on the head in an effort to prevent him from being gay, the child's mother, Nysheerah Paris, told the court Monday.
The boy was 3 years old when he died from swelling on both sides of the brain on January 28.
Others backed up the mother's testimony on the first day of the capital murder trial of Ronnie Paris Jr, 21, of Tampa, Florida. Paris is accused of physically abusing the toddler until the boy slipped into a coma.
"He was trying to teach him how to fight," the boy's aunt, Shanita Powell, told the court. "He was concerned that the child might be gay."
"He didn't want him to be a sissy," Shelton Bostic, the defendant's Bible-study friend, testified.
[More at URL]
----- 4 -----
The Party Matters
Fr. Frank Pavone
National Director, Priests for Life
http://www.priestsforlife.org/columns/columns2005/05-07-18thepartymatters.htm
When deciding on the candidate for whom you cast your vote in an election, a number of moral principles have to be considered. As I have often written in the past, the position of the candidate him/herself on the most important issues is of key importance, because by putting that person in a position to vote on legislation, you help to move public policy either closer or farther away from the moral law.
But that very consideration also means that the positions of the party to which the candidate belongs also matter. By putting that candidate in office, you also help to put his/her party into power. This has to be taken into consideration, too. Voters need to ask how much the election of a particular candidate will shift the balance of power between the parties, and what will happen when a particular party takes control. Voters should know the platform of the party and the official positions of party leadership on the same moral issues on which the individual candidate is evaluated.
At times, in all parties, the individual candidate will take a different position than his/her party on fundamental moral issues. Yet if the election of that candidate would shift control to his/her party, which holds the opposite position on those issues, a vote for that candidate, in effect, works against the position the voter may be trying to advance.
In short, the party matters.
[More at URL]
----- 5 -----
The Safe Pick
Conservatives hoped for a demonstrably conservative nominee with a streak of daring. They didn't get one.
by Fred Barnes
07/19/2005 11:39:00 PM
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/005/854zcwhn.asp
PRESIDENT BUSH kept his promise in nominating John Roberts, a federal appeals court judge, to replace Justice Sandra Day O'Connor the Supreme Court. Since Bush first announced for the presidency in 1999, he has vowed to name judicial conservatives who will interpret the law rather than legislate from the bench and fabricate new rights. Roberts, the president's first Supreme Court pick, qualifies as a judicial conservative, or as Republican Sen. John Cornyn called him, "a mainstream traditionalist." His confirmation will nudge the court to the right. And confirmation appears highly likely.
But there's more to the Roberts choice than that. In choosing among judicial conservatives, there are safe picks and risky picks. With Roberts, Bush took the safe route. Related to this, there are cautious judicial conservatives and bold judicial conservatives. The president tilted to the cautious side in naming Roberts.
How safe was the pick? The answer is very. This is partly because of his impressive credentials as a brilliant legal scholar and man of solid temperament and character. More important, he's already been tested in the Senate and passed muster. In 2003, his nomination to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia sailed through the Senate Judiciary Committee on a 16-3 vote. He cleared the full Senate on a voice vote. If you are committed to choosing a genuine judicial conservative, it doesn't get much safer than Roberts.
Bush had the opportunity to take a riskier approach. His list of possible nominees included a number of federal judges who would have faced truculent opposition by most Senate Democrats and by the liberal groups allied with them. These included Judges Michael Luttig of the 4th U.S. Court of Appeals and Edith Jones of the 5th. Confirmation of either would have been difficult and involved a nasty and bitter clash between Republicans and Democrats. Still, they'd likely have been confirmed. The hearings and debate on Roberts are expected to be kinder and gentler.
More than any decision in Bush's second term, conservatives around the country have been focused on what he'd do when faced with a Supreme Court vacancy. Their hope was for a demonstrably conservative nominee with a streak of daring. In Roberts, they didn't get one, at least from all appearances. He's an establishment conservative, respected as a private attorney and admired as a judge. Audacious he is not. On the other hand, there's little concern that he might drift sharply to the left as Justice David Souter, nominated by the elder President Bush, has.
[More at URL]
----- 6 -----
Send a Letter to the Editor Supporting Judge John Roberts
Focus on the Family
Editor's Note
[Received in email; no URL]
President Bush has nominated federal appeals court Judge
John Roberts to the U.S. Supreme Court -- a choice hailed
by Focus on the Family Action Chairman James C. Dobson,
Ph.D.
"Judge Roberts is an unquestionably qualified attorney and
judge with impressive experience in the government and the
private sector," Dobson said. "He has demonstrated at
every stop on his career path the legal acumen, judicial
temperament and personal integrity necessary to be a
Supreme Court justice."
But liberal pressure groups are already mobilizing to
upend Roberts' nomination, hoping to convince Americans he
is not suitable to serve. You can play a key role in
thwarting their plans -- by sending a letter to the editor
of your local newspaper stressing Roberts' solid
qualifications and character.
We've made it easy for you to put one together by
gathering a series of points you can use to make a
compelling argument in favor of Judge Roberts receiving a
fair Senate confirmation hearing and an up-or-down vote on
his nomination. You can have a publishable letter ready
in just a few minutes by visiting the link below.
http://www.family.org/cforum/extras/a0037257.cfm
----- 7 -----
Roberts: A Man of Character
by Pete Winn, associate editor
Focus on the Family
Citizenlink Breaking News
SUMMARY: The president's nominee is described as a man of
"extraordinary accomplishment."
[Received in email; no URL]
President Bush on Tuesday tapped Judge John Roberts to
become the nation's 109th Supreme Court justice,
introducing him to the nation in prime time. Today, the
confirmation process got under way with Roberts having
coffee at the White House.
"I just had a cup of coffee with the nominee and told him
I thought things were off to a very good start for his
nomination," Bush told reporters. "I'm not surprised --
he's highly qualified for the job. He's the kind of person
that will bring great dignity to the Court. Judge Roberts
is off to the Senate this morning to begin his
consultations. I'm confident the senators will come to
realize what I've come to realize: We're lucky to have a
man of such wisdom and intellectual strength willing to
serve our country."
Bush's comments this morning parallel what he said in
presenting his nominee Tuesday evening. The president
called Roberts "a man of extraordinary accomplishment and
ability" -- adding that the prominent attorney and judge
"has a good heart."
"He has the qualities Americans expect in a judge," Bush
said, "experience, wisdom, fairness, and civility. He has
profound respect for the rule of law and for the liberties
guaranteed to every citizen. He will strictly apply the
Constitution and laws, not legislate from the bench."
But the president didn't just talk about Roberts' judicial
philosophy. He also talked about Roberts' family.
"He's also a man of character who loves his country and
his family," the president told America. "I'm pleased that
his wife, Jane, and his two beautiful children, Jack and
Josie, could be with us tonight. Judge Roberts has served
his fellow citizens well, and he is prepared for even
greater service."
Former Indiana Republican Congressman David McIntosh
agreed. He said he has known Roberts from the days when
they served together in the Justice Department during the
first Bush administration. He described Roberts as a
down-to-earth man with a good sense of humor -- and
someone fellow Hoosiers are proud of.
"John is a tremendous guy, a very bright intelligent
lawyer," McIntosh said. "I have a great deal of admiration
for him. He's genuinely humble, he can poke fun at
himself, as well as the situations he's in. And he's a
very strong family man."
McIntosh said Roberts grew up in Long Beach, Ind., not far
from Lake Michigan. His dad worked at Bethlehem Steel's
Michigan City plant -- where the nominee also found work
during college.
The product of parochial schools, Roberts described
himself as a "slow-footed" halfback who was chosen as
captain of his high school football team. He was also on
the wrestling team and graduated first in his class.
"I know that John is a man of strong faith," McIntosh told
CitizenLink. "I know he cares about his family, but most
important for this job, he loves the Constitution of the
United States, and he doesn't believe judges should impose
their political opinion, but they should be faithful to
that."
Pro-family leaders today told reporters that even though
we don't know everything there is to know about the
nominee, what we do know speaks well of him.
Focus on the Family Action Chairman James C. Dobson,
Ph.D., said Roberts is clearly not a David Souter -- a
reference to a current Supreme Court justice who was
nominated by the elder President Bush in the 1980s. Souter
was expected to be a strong conservative, but has proven
to be one of the most liberal of the justices sitting on
the court. No one knew the truth about Souter's positions
during his confirmation, Dobson said.
"I think we do know a lot about Judge Roberts," Dobson
said, "from his life, from his record, from the things
that he has stood for, and we feel much more comfortable
with this nomination than we would have with Justice
Souter."
Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council,
said conservatives know what they are looking for in a
justice.
"We're looking for a judge who understands that the role
of crafting public policy is in the hands of the
legislative branch," Perkins said, "and Judge Roberts does
have that track record, both in terms of his opinions and
his briefings. He has shown judicial restraint and that
policy matters are better decided by the elected
representatives."
Robert George, McCormick professor of jurisprudence and
politics at Princeton University, told reporters that
conservatives may not like Roberts' every decision. But
that's not the point.
"There is no guarantee with an originalist or a
constitutionalist judge that that judge will always rule
on the conservative side in a political debate. Nor should
there be any guarantee," he said. "The task of the judge
is not to give victories to liberals or conservatives --
but to faithfully apply the Constitution and its norms."
McIntosh said Roberts, in the end, is a good man -- not a
perfect man -- but a good man.
"You can bet a lot of money that these radical groups in
Washington are combing through everything he might have
said or written or whispered trying to find out, 'Is there
a secret side to this person?' My guess is that they won't
find anything. In the past, I've seen them make up things
about people, like Clarence Thomas. But, Lord willing, I
think the Senate is prepared to be fair and hear out the
arguments. But he's a strong man -- and a strong man of
character."
TAKE ACTION: Encourage your senators to give Roberts a
fair hearing and an up-or-down vote. You can reach them
through the CitizenLink Action Center:
http://www3.capwiz.com/fof/mail/oneclick_compose/?alertid=7855151
----- 8 -----
Rove Allegations Called a 'Pseudo Scandal'
by Bill Wilson, Washington, D.C., correspondent
Focus on the Family
SUMMARY: Observers say it's an attempt by liberals and the
media to discredit Bush.
http://www.family.org/cforum/fnif/news/a0037225.cfm
Did he or didn't he break the law? The truth about Karl
Rove's alleged outing of a CIA agent is clouded by both
the news media's circus coverage and a thirst by liberals
to discredit the Bush administration.
White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan continuously
faces persistent questions about the investigation of the
senior advisor to the president, and he repeats the same
answer.
"Some of you asked a couple of questions about: Does the
President still have confidence in particular individuals,
specifically Karl Rove," he said at a recent press
conference. "I don't want to get into commenting on things
in the context of an ongoing investigation."
American Values President Gary Bauer said the insider's
take in Washington is that this is less about Rove's guilt
or innocence and more about an overall strategy to
discredit the administration.
[More at URL]
----- 9 -----
Family News in Focus
Thursday, July 21, 2005
Focus on the Family
http://www.oneplace.com/Ministries/Family_News_in_Focus/
* Will John Roberts’ faith become an issue in his confirmation hearings for High Court? Some fear liberals will attack him because he’s a devout Christian
1. "Democrats by and large are taking a wait and see approach" on Roberts. Conservatives claim "Catholic faith will be used against him." Whine, whine, whine. Attacking Senator Leihi as likely to attack on the basis of religion, trying to paint him as anti-Catholic and anti-religious. "Republicans... are equally alert to the possibility of faith being an issue." "The question now becomes: do we trust the process?"
* FDA is warning doctors about deadly side effects to women who use the abortion pill – RU 486
2. "Bringing the death toll to 10 in the US and Europe." FDA telling doctors to be on the lookout for a particular kind of infection. Fundamentalists talk about "many groups" (them) complaining about RU486 for years. Christian Medical Association compares RU-486 to starving a human being to death. (Seriously.) Says no warning label should be good enough because it's still an abortifactant.
* New push to get cable subscribers a voice in what kind of programming they get
3. Several "pro-family" groups are trying to get ala carte programming - the ability to buy individual channels. Concerned Women for America has this as a big hobby-horse. Claims 67% of Americans polled support ala carte programming. "Why should people have to pay for channels that they don't want to watch?" Admits that ala carte programming would end up raising rates for all cable customers, but specifically say that's okay.
* Each year Congress tries, and fails, to repeal the “Mexico City” policy prohibiting U.S. funding of abortions overseas - Another attempt is coming
5. Foreign Operation Appropriations Bill will be vetoed if it overturns Mexico City, which bans any funding for groups that provide abortion services, independent of whether the money is spent for abortions. Note that this is the exact opposite of their position on funding religious organisations.
* Think tank says the black family is failing and it’s time to promote Christian vision for marriage
4. "Blacks are marrying less, and 70% of black children are born to unwed mothers." "It's time to get the black church front and centre in promoting traditional marriage." Pushes "God's Gift: A Christian Vision for Marriage in the Black Family."
* After 24 years, Florida Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen wants a debt settled – She’s introduced bill that would allow survivors of 1970’s Iranian hostage crisis to sue for damages
6. Algers Accord prevents suing; bill changes US law to allow lawsuits.
----- 10 -----
President Bush Nominates Judge John G. Roberts to the U.S. Supreme Court!
"He fulfills the President's promise," says CWA's Chief Counsel Jan LaRue. "We're thrilled!"
Concerned Women for America
Statement from Mrs. Beverly LaHaye, Founder and Chairman of CWA
Linked to from main page at http://www.cwfa.org/main.asp
I’m thrilled with the president’s nomination of John G. Roberts as associate justice of the Supreme Court. Every indication suggests that Judge Roberts meets the key test of the president’s own promise to nominate someone like Justice Scalia or Justice Thomas. Judge Roberts respects the Constitution as a document that says what it means – not more, not less. His extensive experience shows that he is well equipped to resist the temptation to substitute the actual words of the Constitution with his own whim. It’s clear to me that the president has earned the praise he is receiving for his choice and I join in applauding President Bush for his decisive and well-considered selection. Liberal Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee, spurred on by their leftist abortion lobby, will do all that they can to attack Judge Roberts but they will fail. Concerned Women for America will do all in our power to support him all the way to confirmation.
Mrs.Beverly LaHaye,
Founder and Chairman
Concerned Women for America
----- 11 -----
Critics lament loss of woman's perspective
Some question wisdom of putting another white male on high court
By Stephanie Desmon
Sun Staff
Originally published July 21, 2005
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/nationworld/bal-te.diversity21jul21,1,7700310.story?coll=bal-news-nation&ctrack=1&cset=true
Retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor praised Judge John G. Roberts Jr. to a reporter in Idaho soon after his selection as the president's choice to fill her seat on the Supreme Court was made public, noting, "He's good in every way, except he's not a woman."
To many women, the sight of another white male receiving a lifetime appointment to the most influential court in the nation sends an upsetting message: Despite huge gains in the legal profession, where women make up 30 percent of the bar and more than 50 percent of law school classes, there are still limits, many said.
"The face of yet another privileged white male who went to Harvard is, to me, a slap in the face to women in America," said Karen O'Connor, a professor of government at American University and director of its Women Politics Institute. "If everyone on that court looks the same, they begin to speak in one voice because they've had the same life experiences."
The experiences of men and women in this country, O'Connor and others said, are not the same. A woman's perspective might be shaped by things many men never grapple with, be it gender discrimination or reproductive rights or simply what it means to go through life as a woman. The loss of a female voice could mean the loss of something a man just can't bring to the discussion, whatever that might be in any given case, several said.
"We live in a different world than men, so our responses are going to be different," said Lisa A. Gladden, an assistant public defender in Baltimore and a state senator. "We are moving in a direction of equality. We're not there yet. ...
"We don't want just a whole bunch of suits with pants. We need two skirts in there, three skirts, four. Half the bench should be women. One woman is a token. Two women is a contribution."
[More at URL]
----- 12 -----
CWA Applauds Supreme Court Choice
Concerned Women for America
7/20/2005
By Seana Cranston
Express your support to the White House and your senators!
http://www.cwfa.org/articles/8579/LEGAL/scourt/index.htm
Concerned Women for America and citizens across the country rejoice today upon President Bush’s nomination of Judge John Roberts to the United States Supreme Court. The President has indeed proven himself a man of his word. He has nominated a jurist of integrity, a family man of faith, who will faithfully interpret the Constitution, rather than legislate from the bench.
Judge Roberts has extensive legal experience and an outstanding background within the conservative legal community. He graduated magna cum laude from Harvard University Law School, where he served as an editor of the Harvard Law Review. Upon graduation from law school, Roberts clerked first for Judge Henry Friendly of the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, and then for Chief Justice William Rehnquist at the U.S. Supreme Court.
He also served as Associate Counsel to President Ronald Reagan and as Principal Deputy Solicitor General in the first Bush administration. Remarkably, Roberts has argued a record 39 cases before the U.S. Supreme Court. In June of 2003, President George W. Bush elevated Roberts to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
In testimony to Judge Roberts’ character and outstanding reputation, newspaper and media outlets around the country have published words of praise for him:
[More at URL, including action item to call or write the White House and your senators in support]
----- 13 -----
Thank President Bush for Nominating Judge Roberts
July 20, 2005 - Wednesday
Forward to a Friend!
http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=AL05G10
Last night President Bush announced his choice of Judge John G. Roberts to fill the vacancy on the U.S. Supreme Court created by the retirement of Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. The President has selected a jurist who is intellectually powerful, committed to the rule of law, steeped in character, and determined not to legislate from the bench. During his time on the national political stage, President Bush has said he would nominate to the Supreme Court individuals who reflect the judicial philosophy of the justices he most admires, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas.
By picking John G. Roberts, the President has been true to his word. Join us in sending a message of thanks to President Bush for making this strong nomination. Judge Roberts now embarks on a confirmation process that should be fair, thorough and swift. He is entitled to an up or down vote, and the American people are entitled to have a full complement of nine justices ready to work when the Supreme Court convenes for its fall session on October 3, 2005. Tell President Bush you will stand by him and urge the Senate to complete its "advise and consent" role promptly.
----- 14 -----
SUPREME COURT NOMINEE TAKE ACTION CENTER
Traditional Values Coalition
http://www.traditionalvalues.org/modules.php?sid=2353
July 21, 2005 – Supreme Court nominee Judge John Roberts deserves our support to be confirmed by an up or down vote in the full Senate. The character assassins are already out in full force trying to destroy his chances of confirmation.
President Bush deserves our thanks. We urge you to send a letter of support for Judge John Roberts to President Bush by using TVC’s CapWiz service: http://capwiz.com/traditional/mail/oneclick_compose/?alertid=7857811
The pre-written letter to President Bush on Judge John Roberts says:
Dear President Bush:
I want to express my sincere thanks to you for choosing Judge John Roberts to become our next Supreme Court Justice.
Judge Roberts is the perfect choice to replace Justice O’Connor. As you have stated, he is wise, fair, and will interpret the law, not legislate from the bench.
Your choice of Judge Roberts is one of historic proportions and will do much to restore confidence on our nation’s federal court system. Liberal activists on the federal bench have done much damage to our nation and to the confidence of most Americans in the fairness of the judicial system.
Thank you so much. Please know that I will be actively supporting him during the confirmation process. You are both in my prayers.
Sincerely,
----- 15 -----
TVC Pleased With President Bush’s Supreme Court Pick!
For Immediate Release July 20, 2005
Contact: Amy Skeen (202) 547-8570
http://www.traditionalvalues.org/modules.php?sid=2352
Washington, DC – “President Bush is to be applauded for his choice of Judge John Roberts to replace Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor on the Court,” said Traditional Values Coalition Chairman, Rev. Louis P. Sheldon. We fully concur with President Bush when he said, ‘when a President chooses a Justice, he's placing in human hands the authority and majesty of the law.’
----- 16 -----
Why the FBI watches the left
Michelle Malkin
Posted: July 20, 2005
1:00 a.m. Eastern
© 2005 Creators Syndicate Inc.
http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=45357
Oh, dear. Oh, dear. Civil-liberties activists, anti-war organizers, eco-militants and animal-rights operatives are in a fright over news that the nefarious FBI is watching them. Why on earth would the government be worried about harmless liberal grannies, innocent vegetarians, unassuming rainforest lovers and other "peaceful groups" simply exercising their First Amendment rights?
Let me remind you of some very good reasons.
[More at URL]
----- 17 -----
John Roberts is no Scalia
Posted: July 21, 2005
1:00 a.m. Eastern
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=45379
© 2005 Creators Syndicate Inc.
On Tuesday evening, President Bush nominated Judge John G. Roberts Jr. to the Supreme Court of the United States. "He will strictly apply the Constitution and laws, not legislate from the bench," Bush stated of Roberts. Conservatives immediately leapt on the Roberts bandwagon, echoing Bush's sentiments. Talk-radio commentator Hugh Hewitt labeled Roberts "a home run." The Heritage Foundation's legal experts cited Roberts' "proven fidelity to the Constitution and the rule of law" in backing his nomination. Bill Kristol of The Weekly Standard called Roberts "a quality pick."
Perhaps Roberts is a safe pick. He's politically conservative and undoubtedly brilliant. He will sail through the Senate without much hassle. But it is shocking to watch many constitutional originalists and textualists abandon their philosophies in favor of cheap politics.
[More at URL]
----- 18 -----
Heritage Foundation Legal Experts Laud Bush's Choice for High Court
The Heritage Foundation
http://www.heritage.org/Press/NewsReleases/nr071905a.cfm
WASHINGTON, JULY 19, 2005--The Heritage Foundation's Center for Legal and Judicial Studies, Chairman Edwin Meese III, Director Todd Gaziano and Senior Legal Fellow Paul Rosenzweig, tonight issued the following statement on John G. Roberts, President Bush's new Supreme Court nominee:
"President Bush promised the American people that he would nominate Supreme Court justices who would not legislate from the bench and would be in the mold of Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia.
"He has fulfilled that promise tonight, with the selection of a judge of unquestionable integrity and proven fidelity to the Constitution and the rule of law.
"In addition, John Roberts brings a wealth of valuable experience beyond his years on the bench that will be helpful to the Supreme Court's deliberations. Indeed, Roberts's life experiences make him a uniquely well-qualified nominee for the high court.
"As a former principal deputy solicitor general, associate White House counsel and other positions spanning two administrations, Roberts has a keen knowledge of the government and the federal justice system. As a distinguished private practitioner and Supreme Court advocate, Roberts also understands how the law affects the lives of ordinary Americans and our productive enterprises.
"We are proud to have worked with him during his time in government and when he was a private practitioner at Hogan & Hartson. We are confident his service on the Supreme Court will be a distinguished one that will make all Americans proud.
"The president has done his duty with great care and promptness. Now, it's the Senate's turn. The American people will rightly demand that senators conduct themselves expeditiously and with civility as they carry out their constitutional 'advice and consent' responsibilities.
"We are confident that they will do so to allow the new justice to take his seat on the bench by the first Monday of October."
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2005-07-21 04:28 pm (UTC)The fuck. THREE YEARS OLD.
no subject
Date: 2005-07-21 04:51 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-07-21 05:20 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-07-21 05:45 pm (UTC)Finally
Date: 2005-08-09 06:22 am (UTC)I'm about to mail this....
Date: 2005-07-21 05:28 pm (UTC)To: letter@globe.com,letterstotheeditor@bostonherald.com
Subject: beware form letters on Roberts
I do not wish to quash any specific political opinions; nor do I have a particular gripe regarding Supreme Court nominee Judge Roberts. I do have a quarrel with the tactics groups like Focus on the Family use to try to disguise what are essentially form letters to be sent to newspaper editors.
I undertsand that these become harder and harder to detect as the organizations who use them become more sophisticated. Please visit http://www.family.org/cforum/extras/a0037257.cfm and do not print any letters that come to you generated by their "one from column A, one from column B" method. Reserve your letters page for letters written by the individual who signs them.
Sincerely,
(signature)
The story about the 3-year-old is appalling. But it sounds to me more like mental illness than homophobia as such.