Patterico's Pontifications

7/6/2005

Gonzales on Roe and Stare Decisis

Filed under: Abortion,Judiciary — Patterico @ 6:42 pm

This morning I heard Laura Ingraham interviewing Robert Bork. She mentioned that she had a transcript of Alberto Gonzales telling some group that he believed Roe v. Wade should be upheld under the doctrine of stare decisis. Bork replied: “Oh, my God.”

I searched the Web for evidence of this. This is the closest thing I found:

Life Issues Institute president Dr. John C. Willke is warning pro-lifers to be wary of Bush chief counsel Alberto Gonzales. Twice, Dr. Willke has gotten the opportunity to ask Judge Gonzales direct questions about how he might rule on abortion-related cases, and he reports that the answers contradicted what most conservatives have been led to believe about the former Texas state Chief Justice. On one occasion, Willke asked, “Would you say that, regarding Roe v. Wade, stare decisis [Lat. “to stand by that which is decided”] would be governing here?” Gonzales answered “yes.” A couple months later, Willke got a chance to pose the question a different way: “Many of us feel that the Constitution does not speak to permissive abortion. Would you comment?” Gonzales’ answer: “The Constitution is what the Supreme Court says it is.”

I echo the sentiments of the Clam: watch out for Gonzales.

UPDATE: Courtesy of commenter Andrew from Confirm Them comes a much better link on this issue. Thanks, Andrew.

When Democrats Endorse Him, Run the Other Way

Filed under: Judiciary — Angry Clam @ 2:01 pm

[Posted by Angry Clam]

Harry Reid says that Gonzales is qualified for the Supreme Court.

Alberto Gonzales is Spanish for “David Souter.” Remember that.

To Hell With Consensus- Grind them into the Dirt

Filed under: Judiciary,Law — Angry Clam @ 1:18 pm

[Posted by Angry Clam]

Senator Schumer got busted promising all out war against whomever the President nominates to the Supreme Court.

Shocking news, I know. Despite all their talk of “consensus” and “consultation” and “compromise,” the Democrats, as usual, have no interest in such things.

Schumer and the Democrats aren’t interested in consensus, Mr. President. They want you to put someone on the Court that they want. That’s what all this talk of appointing a “moderate” is- it means, as it always has, both when referring to Republicans (John McCain, Lincoln Chafee) and to Democrats (Hillary Clinton!): liberals.

(more…)

Smeal Spreads A Deliberate Lie About Roe

Filed under: Abortion,Judiciary — Patterico @ 6:54 am

It may not be much of a news flash, I guess . . . but Feminist Majority president Eleanor Smeal is lying to her supporters about the danger that Justice O’Connor’s resignation poses to Roe v. Wade. I use the word “lying” because there is proof to back up that charge.

According to Brendan Nyhan, Smeal has written an e-mail to her supporters that says:

This is it! The worst has happened with the resignation of Sandra Day O’Connor. Let there be no mistake about it: Sandra Day O’Connor was the 5th vote that was saving Roe v. Wade.

(Via Michelle Malkin.)

Of course, as I reminded you the other day, the current lineup of the Court contains 6 votes to maintain the basic right to abortion created in Roe. O’Connor’s departure still leaves 5 votes on the Court to uphold Roe. I like Nyhan’s comment: “There’s nothing worse than people saying ‘Let there be no mistake’ and then making a mistake.”

Except that, in Smeal’s case, it’s not a mistake. When I learned that Atrios and Josh Marshall had made similar claims, I was willing to chalk it up to their general cluelessness. But Smeal lives and breathes this stuff. How could she possibly not know this?

Well, it turns out that, of course, she does. She has been quoted making the false “one vote away” claim before, of course — but she knows it’s not true. This article from March 22, 2004 proves it:

Political participation by students is more important than ever, said Smeal, with the fate of Roe v. Wade “hanging by two votes at best.”

The lineup at the Supreme Court hasn’t changed since March 2004; indeed, it hasn’t changed in 11 years. Eleanor Smeal knows full well that Justice O’Connor was not the “5th vote that was saving Roe v. Wade” — but she is lying to her supporters about it.

Look for more lies along these lines in the days and weeks to come.

UPDATE: Are lies like this having an effect? Ask Darcy Vernier of Marina del Rey. She wrote this letter to the editors of the L.A. Times, which was printed this morning:

Goodbye, Justice O’Connor. Goodbye, Roe vs. Wade. Goodbye, separation of church and state. Goodbye, civil liberties.

Darcy Vernier
Marina del Rey

The answer is yes. These lies are having an effect.

Correction Watch, Part II

Filed under: Dog Trainer — Patterico @ 6:21 am

I was told yesterday by the Readers’ Representative that the paper would be running a correction today of the erroneous statement that began Saturday’s editorial regarding Justice O’Connor.

Well, if it did run today, I can’t find it.

Tell the Truth About Kyoto

Filed under: Dog Trainer,Environment — Patterico @ 12:19 am

I have no use for a front-page article like this one from the L.A. Times, which is a love letter to the Kyoto Protocol that manages to omit two salient facts:

1) Many nations — significantly including China and India — are exempt from compliance with the Kyoto Protocol. (No wonder they signed it.)

2) In 1997, the Senate voted 95-0 that the United States should not sign a treaty with the exact flaws that the Kyoto Protocol turned out to have.

My favorite line from the article:

In addition to economic concerns, Bush has rejected the pact because of objections to the way it divides emissions cutbacks between developed and undeveloped countries.

I guess that’s one way to characterize exempting 80 percent of the world from compliance. That’s like saying that, when you accuse me of stealing all your money, you’re really just objecting to the way that I have divided your money between the two of us.

Roy Rivenburg on the CortiSlim Lifestyle

Filed under: Dog Trainer — Patterico @ 12:05 am

Roy Rivenburg has an interesting article on that CortiSlim pill that is so familiar to us talk-radio listeners. It’s titled This Diet Pill Contains Saturated Advertising and appears to be Rivenburg’s first piece written since his transfer to the L.A. Times Metro section. Very well-written. Nice job.


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.1994 secs.