Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for November 14th, 2005

Submit a Caption

Condi Frankly, I don’t have the readership to do this, but someone has to.
Advertisements

Read Full Post »

From the Washington Times:
Judge Samuel A. Alito Jr., President Bush’s Supreme Court nominee, wrote that "the Constitution does not protect a right to an abortion" in a 1985 document obtained by The Washington Times.
Its not like opponents needed more ammunition, but this certainly takes away any ambiguity. But it may be a non issue. Of the four decisions he rendered since making that statement, he sided with the pro choice camp three times. But what should we make of the statements?
"The issue is not Judge Alito’s political views during the Reagan administration 20 years ago," the Republican official said. "It’s his 15 years of jurisprudence, which can be evaluated in hundreds of opinions. And in none of those opinions is it evident what his political philosophy is.
    "Ruth Bader Ginsburg had a long history of advocacy on behalf of liberal causes, but she was evaluated on her 13-year record as a federal judge and her jurisprudence, not her belief that there was a constitutional right to prostitution or polygamy."
    Although Judge Alito’s conservatism has not been particularly evident in his legal rulings, it was abundantly clear in his job application 20 years ago.
Intellectually honest pro choicers should give Alito’s stated opinion from 20 years ago the same weight attached to Ginsburg’s moonbat beliefs. Frankly Roe v Wade was a bad decision, and you don’t need to be pro life to feel that way.
Update: As the Political Teen shows, Alito’s 1985 sentiments appear to energize the conservaties.

Read Full Post »

Ah, the things we real estate brokers see when we are showing property.

Read Full Post »