Tuesday, January 31, 2006

Justice Samuel Alito

Yesterday’s cloture vote to end debate on the nomination of Samuel Alito to the U.S. Supreme Court and to allow a confirmation vote today signaled the end to the major media’s dominance of national affairs and its ability to shape public opinion.

It also marked the end of the political careers of Massachusetts Senators Edward Kennedy and John Kerry. Of course, they don’t know it and neither do their blinded by hate supporters, but the failure of these extreme left wing Democrats to convince their fellow senators to drink the kool-aid only confirms this conclusion.

From the beginning, this author stated that there would not be a filibuster. Sam Alito was examined by the American people and found normal. His mother told the nation what her son thought about the most controversial issue of our time, and the public concluded that this was good. Judge Alito explained to the Senate his views on a host of issues and deferred as was appropriate on any future subjects that would be likely to come before the court.
Finally, the people saw him as a family guy who likes the Phillies and coaches Little League. What is not to like? 15 years on the bench, prior to that a U.S. attorney, prior to that the Reagan White House, ABA well qualified rating, NLA well qualified rating; all of this resonated well with the American people.

However, the left and the liberal Democrats are not in touch with the common man. They think everything is about “protecting a woman’s right to abortion.” And if the country were made up of liberal college professors and lifetime government employees and Hollywood types, they would be right. The Alito nomination has always been about abortion. As stupid as it sounds, Democrats like Kennedy and Kerry, Durbin and Biden, Leahy and the rest are all about abortion. They are in the hip pocket of the abortion lobby, which incidentally, includes the radical homosexual lobby as well. And while it makes no sense politically, the Democratic Party has been on this abortion “binge” for almost 30 years since 1976. I remember, because it was at the 1976 Democratic Convention in New York City that the convention added a pro-abortion plank to the party platform. I was there in New York City protesting the plank with over 10,000 fellow pro-life intercessors.

Shortly thereafter, I left the Democratic Party and became a Republican because a candidate for president in 1976 publicly supported the right to life, explained how he had made a mistake when he was governor of California and wanted to correct the problem. Ronald Reagan had no problem understanding the humanity of the unborn. And while he would make two major errors in 1) nominating Sandra Day O’Connor, and 2) failing to have his staff push the pro-life agenda in 1981. But that was then and this is now.

For now we can celebrate the return to sanity. Now I am not saying that the White House wants to have an open debate on Roe. The folks in Washington still fear the press. But we see the changing tide. The momentum as I said in other comments is on our side. For we are on the side of life; and that is the only place to be.

2 Comments:

At 10:50 PM, Anonymous John K. Walker said...

Sir:

Bravo for the excellent points you made in this blog, particularly in demonstrating your organization’s officially non-partisan, strictly pro-life stance by candidly criticizing the Reagan administration’s failures to pursue its proclaimed pro-life policies. (Without question, the most significant pro-life action Ronald Reagan ever did take was inserting the still-operative pro-life plank into the Republican platform in 1980, after Gerald Ford’s 1976 stance was for state’s rights, and the party platform’s language was meaningless.) Most conservative political columnists, even if they are pro-life themselves, have developed a sense of amnesia not only about his having nominated (largely on Barry Goldwater's advice), and never renounced, Sandra Day O’Connor (and to a lesser extent Anthony Kennedy, albeit after losing on Bork), despite her documented history of having worked to liberalize Arizona’s abortion law as State Senate President prior to Roe v. Wade, as detailed in the latest National Right to Life News. (Note: I happened to be at a meeting in AZRTL’s offices this past summer when Dr. Gerster came in, proudly showing a picture of herself and John Willke testifying before the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee in 1981 against O’Connor’s nomination....)

And it should be noted that among the national disgraces you mentioned, Kennedy, Leahy, and Durbin (my former Congressman) are all turncoats, having “evolved” from pro-lifers into abortion advocates during their (unfortunately for the rest of us) long stints in Washington. (Dick Durbin actually used to attend our Right to Life rallies in Illinois before his inspiring conversion.)

A question on your statement about Reagan’s 1976 Presidential campaign (which I favored then also, entirely because he was pro-life, although I was still too young to vote): Is there any actual documentation of his admitting that signing a de facto abortion-on-demand statute into law as California Governor in 1969 was a tragic mistake? In over twenty years of searching, I have never found any such specific statement. During the campaign, John Sears, his campaign manager, was asked about this turnaround on “Face The Nation,” and just weaved around answering the question.

Also, do remember whether Ellen MacCormack happened to be among your protest group at the 1976 Democratic Convention? I remember that as National Right to Life Party candidate for President that year, she gave a half-hour nationally televised presentation about a week before the election that I wish more people had heeded.

 
At 10:02 AM, Blogger Alnot said...

I will vote for prolife every time. If the Republicans should drop their pro life platform I would drop them. Just as voters dropped the Whig party when they failed to deal with slavery.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home