A note on the Amazon ads: I've chosen to display current events titles in the Amazon box. Unfortunately, Amazon appears to promote a disproportionate number of angry-left books. I have no power over it at this time. Rest assured, I'm still a conservative.
|
Sunday, February 17, 2002
The Washington Post assails the treatment President Bush's latest nominee to the 5th District Court of Appeals. Judge Charles Pickering has been demagogued by Democratic senators as a racist, segregationist and anti-miscegenationist. The Post points out that the claims fo racism appear to be spurious, but while Pickering may not be a racist, he's a simpleton and a conservative.
In his tenure on the district bench, he has shown an amateurish tendency to use legal opinions as vehicles for extended discussions of issues of public controversy. The fact that one of these opinions openly questions basic principles of modern civil rights law makes supporting him difficult.
I'm sure he's appreciative of the support.
But at least the Post calls a spade a spade when it comes to the democratic senators.
Pickering's entire record is not that of a committed -- if now closeted -- segregationist; nor did the Senate find him to be such when it unanimously voted to confirm him as a district judge in 1990. The need on the part of liberal groups and Democratic senators to portray him as a Neanderthal -- all the while denying they are doing so -- in order to justify voting him down is the latest example of the degradation of the confirmation process.
If you'd like to read more on the Pickering nomination, try the following links:
The Next Big Fight:The first major judicial-confirmation battle of the Bush administration.
Behind the Democrats’ Attack:Democrats vs. Charles Pickering.
And, in the interest of presenting both sides of the story:
People [not] for the American Way
12:43 AM
|
|
