jump to navigation

Well Would You Look at That – Another Lawmaker Shows a Complete Misunderstanding of the Third Branch of Government January 28, 2006, 9:24 pm

Posted by quintapalus in Democrat Stupidity, Supreme Court.

Hillary!TM decided to open her mouth today, joining the chorus of idiots who can’t count and support the filibuster of Alito. However, it’s her complete confusion about the role of the Supreme Court that I find the most disconcerting.

From the New York Daily News:

Sen. Hillary Clinton yesterday backed a rebel band of Senate Dems seeking to filibuster a vote on the Supreme Court nomination of Judge Samuel Alito. Democratic leaders had warned that filibuster efforts were going nowhere and would let President Bush score easy political points, but Clinton said, “I oppose his nomination and support efforts to block his confirmation.”

“I do not think Judge Alito would advance the principles Americans hold most dear,” she said, adding she would vote against a move to cut off a filibuster should one occur.

Where exactly does this sort of thinking come from? Being stupid doesn’t count in this case because there are many smart people who would agree with her. Look people, and for my liberal friends I’ll speak slowly and use simple words so as to avoid any confusion, the supreme court isn’t supposed to “advance” anything, much less anything as ambiguous or ever changing as “principles that Americans hold most dear.” Their job is perhaps the simplest (not easy, mind you, just simple) job in all of government: they look at the cases in front of them and simply rule them constitutional or unconstitutional using citations from the Constitution itself or federal law. They are not supposed to create law. They are not supposed to forward anything. They are not the players of the game; they are only the referees.

If Hillary!TM wants to advance anything, she’s in luck because she is a legislator and, holy crap, that’s her job!! Unfortunately, it’s not the job of the Supreme Court.



1. jonathan smith - January 28, 2006, 10:27 pm

Unfortunately, the judiciary is not the legislative? Unfortunately? OK. I guess we don’t live in america anymore.

2. quintapalus - January 28, 2006, 10:42 pm

You’ve misunderstood what I’ve written. I wrote the sentence to mean that unfortunately for Hillary, it is not the judiciary’s job to act as the legislative branch. I’m curious to understand how you thought I was refuting in the last sentence my entire point in writing this article.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: