September 30, 2005

Why did John Roberts get a landslide?
by Liza Sabater

Because the so-called Left are gambling on getting a pro-choice candidate for the O'Connor post. How much you want to bet the next nominee will be another John Roberts?

I am going to go on record as saying that the Democrats had it all wrong. The nominee to fight and batter down was John Roberts, not Sandra Day O'Connor's replacement. The Democratic Party has given cart blanche to the extreme right with the Dominionists' 21.

Howard Dean's press release says that "Democrats are committed to standing up for what we believe and will fight any nominee whose views fall outside of the mainstream, who is not qualified to sit on our nation's highest court and who refuses to provide honest and straightforward answers about their record and views."

Really?

Due diligence was thrown to the wind and appeasement won out. How can you effectively question the next judge if you did not do it with Roberts? How can you effectively critize the next nominee if you did not do so with Roberts? How can you expect to even have a moderate presented to the Judiciary Committee if you did not do your job of representing the interests of your constituents by taking to task the White House for not releasing all the documents that could have given a fuller portrait of Roberts' ideology?

I am sorry, but the Democrats blew it. Roberts' nomination was the test case, not the future replacement for Sandra Day O'Connor.

I cannot help but to stress how the early tactics of NARAL ( which were done with the backing of other pro-choice groups ) helped take focus off the White House and Roberts and only magnified the outdated political thinking and activism of the so-called Left. I am going to take exception with one group, People for the American Way.

They really worked their asses off with their Save The Court campaign. I am talking from the outside here; so this is all purely on my perception but it really looks awful that NARAL would give more credit to the likes of a Lincoln Chafee or an Arlen Specter. I cannot help but wonder what would have happened if the feminists groups, instead of taking their cues from a patriarch like Arlen Specter would have worked from the start with a guy like Ralph Neas.

Ralph Neas is the kind of progressive leader we need to have more often in the media. I really wished these organizations were not stationed in Washington DC because access over there is misconstrued as exposure over here. Ralph Neas ought to be a household name like Ted Kennedy or Howard Dean.

Which makes me think ( 'cause Morgaine would be pissed if I didn't ask this ) : Who are your favorite little known women leaders? Because, you know what, I am drawing a blank here.

There are no women right now who make me feel all fired up and hopeful. Maybe I just have not been paying too much attention. In truth though, I feel nobody stands out at the moment --but I am known to be wrong ... a lot.

Please, give us your list of women leaders who make you feel all fired up and tingly.

Posted by Liza Sabater in DNC, Democrats, Feminists, Howard Dean, John Roberts, NARAL, Reproductive Rights, Roe vs. Wade, SCOTUS, Supreme Court
Permalink | | TrackBack (0) | Technorati Cosmos

Trackbacks

Trackback for this post:
http://www.culturekitchen.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.cgi/3345

The following blogs make reference to this post :