Wednesday, September 21, 2005

My letter to Senator Harry Reid

Dear Senator Reid,

I read the recent reports that you plan on voting against the confirmation of John Roberts for chief Justice of the Supreme Court. In your statement you said, "No one doubts that John Roberts is an excellent lawyer and an affable person. But at the end of this process, I have too many unanswered questions about the nominee to justify a vote confirming him to this enormously important lifetime position." You further state, "I have reluctantly concluded that this nominee has not satisfied the high burden that would justify my voting for his confirmation based on the current record. The question is close, and the arguments against him do not warrant extraordinary procedural tactics to block the nomination," Reid said.

Do you realize how hollow your statement sounds? You say you cannot confirm him, which in essence means you feel he is unqualified to be a Supreme Court Justice, yet you do not feel that you need to block the nomination. There is no doubt that a seat on the SCOTUS is enormously important, yet you don't think it is important enough to filibuster this nomination, yet you have supported filibusters for lower court nominations. Thus I am forced to conclude that your statement lacks intellectual honesty.

What I think has happened is that your party, having been hijacked by the extreme left wing, has become simply a party of opposition instead of a party that should be providing counter ideas to the Republicans. And since you are the minority leader, you feel that you have to lead this party by voting against this more than qualified nominee, simply because the fringes of your party are so vocally against him. Rather, would it not have been more prudent to throw your hat of support into the ring, and show that while you may not agree with Mr. Roberts ideology, you still must consent to his nomination because he is a qualified candidate.

This is what virtually every Senator did with Ruth Bader Ginsburg's nomination. I would have bet that more than 4/5ths of the Republicans felt that Ginsberg should not have been nominated, but because she appeared "qualified" they relented and confirmed her, despite the fact that she does not possess intellectual capacity or intuition that a Supreme Court Justice should have. Despite the fact that she really should not have been confirmed the Senate voted 98-0 to confirm her. This vote happened despite the fact that Ginsburg was General counsel and on the Board of Directors for the very left wing ACLU. And yet you cannot support John Roberts.

It is sad that a man with your religious background, could have lost so much of his roots. It seems that you have abandoned basic LDS principles and beliefs. Yes you are pro-life. But you vote against judges that will do what they need to do and simply interpret the constitution, not amend it by Judicial caveat. You should remember that the Doctrine and Covenants states that God, "established the Constitution of this land, by the hands of wise men whom [he] raised up unto this very purpose" (D&C 101:80). Yet you oppose those people that would actually interpret the Constitution form it's original intent.

Now I do not pretend to think that the Constitution is a perfect document, but it is the foundation that the laws of this country were founded on. You have a charge as a Senator to defend it, not weaken it. Yet with each vote that you give in support of a far left wing agenda, you separate yourself from those of us who believe in this great land. As you stand arm-in-arm with Nancy Pelosi and other left wing liberals, you further align yourself with principles that are contrary to the Doctrines of the gospel that you profess to believe in.

Find some gumption and support this man for SCOTUS. Break ranks and vote what you know to be right.

No comments:

No, there is no anti-Israel Bias at the NY Times.

Recently the New York Times published an Op-Ed of a Palestinian who describes the deplorable conditions that he says exist in Israeli prison...