RE: Bitter Fight Looms
It's just Linda Brinson's usual mix of ignorance, spin, and hyperbole. A couple of curious tidbits:
His [Alito's] record indicates that he would favor laws that would erode, if not explicitly override, Roe vs. Wade, the 1973 Supreme Court decision that made abortion legal.
Here she displays either willful ignorance of the function of the Supreme Court or she exposes her part in the actual leftist agenda: imposition of the leftist vision by oligarchic judicial fiat. A Supreme Court ruling cannot make anything legal in our system. Only the deliberative, republican bodies can do that.
It [Alito's record] also indicates that he does not support a strict separation of church and state.
I'm guessing she's referring to the two rulings on the New Jersey Christmas displays. If so, his record indicates nothing of the sort, leaving aside that constitutional separation of church and state is a liberal myth. It actually indicates a deep understanding of the actual spirit and intent of the first amendment. In both cases, the three judge panel, including Alito, ruled that the government had no business denying religious groups freedom of expression.
Workers' groups are also concerned that he has shown little regard for laws protecting workers from sexual discrimination in the workplace.
Worker's groups...
That's a real hoot, Linda. I expect you got your talking points from the same PFAW document I posted yesterday. Translation for those who haven't read the case history: Worker's groups means trial lawyers who sue employers for specious sexual and workplace harassment charges. Alito has offered (mostly in dissent) that these kinds of claims require more proof than feelings and hearsay in order to come before the courts. The former ambulance-chasers who now prey on corporations with cowardly executives are unhappy because their blackmail leverage would be substantially reduced by any court agreeing with Alito.
Environmental groups say his decisions have made it difficult for them to use the courts to force enforcement of the nation's laws.
No kidding. I'm curious as to where the problem lies in this. Environmentalists, who are mostly leftists, have only themselves to blame for lax enforcement of laws. It is their predecessors, people like Judge Bazelon, who made a mockery of the criminal justice system and created the laissez-faire enforcement mentality. In reality, these groups are only interested in seeing their laws enforced anyway. Their real complaint about Judge Alito is his belief in the principles of equal protection under the law and his refusal to acknowledge the left's belief in its own superior standing before the law.
Linda Brinson and the Winston-Salem Journal are lightweights. Nothing to see here. Move along...
His [Alito's] record indicates that he would favor laws that would erode, if not explicitly override, Roe vs. Wade, the 1973 Supreme Court decision that made abortion legal.
Here she displays either willful ignorance of the function of the Supreme Court or she exposes her part in the actual leftist agenda: imposition of the leftist vision by oligarchic judicial fiat. A Supreme Court ruling cannot make anything legal in our system. Only the deliberative, republican bodies can do that.
It [Alito's record] also indicates that he does not support a strict separation of church and state.
I'm guessing she's referring to the two rulings on the New Jersey Christmas displays. If so, his record indicates nothing of the sort, leaving aside that constitutional separation of church and state is a liberal myth. It actually indicates a deep understanding of the actual spirit and intent of the first amendment. In both cases, the three judge panel, including Alito, ruled that the government had no business denying religious groups freedom of expression.
Workers' groups are also concerned that he has shown little regard for laws protecting workers from sexual discrimination in the workplace.
Worker's groups...
That's a real hoot, Linda. I expect you got your talking points from the same PFAW document I posted yesterday. Translation for those who haven't read the case history: Worker's groups means trial lawyers who sue employers for specious sexual and workplace harassment charges. Alito has offered (mostly in dissent) that these kinds of claims require more proof than feelings and hearsay in order to come before the courts. The former ambulance-chasers who now prey on corporations with cowardly executives are unhappy because their blackmail leverage would be substantially reduced by any court agreeing with Alito.
Environmental groups say his decisions have made it difficult for them to use the courts to force enforcement of the nation's laws.
No kidding. I'm curious as to where the problem lies in this. Environmentalists, who are mostly leftists, have only themselves to blame for lax enforcement of laws. It is their predecessors, people like Judge Bazelon, who made a mockery of the criminal justice system and created the laissez-faire enforcement mentality. In reality, these groups are only interested in seeing their laws enforced anyway. Their real complaint about Judge Alito is his belief in the principles of equal protection under the law and his refusal to acknowledge the left's belief in its own superior standing before the law.
Linda Brinson and the Winston-Salem Journal are lightweights. Nothing to see here. Move along...
posted by Anonymous | 8:20 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home