Claude Cartaginese

Schumer and Dems See No Legit Reason Why any Obama Nominees Should Be Rejected

Posted on April 8 2009 2:01 pm
Be Sociable, Share!
Print This Post Print This Post

New York’s Democrat Senator Charles Schumer appeared on the Rachel Maddow Show last evening to discuss what he views as the Republican Party’s unpatriotic and immature conspiracy to block (by filibuster) a number of high-level government nominees of the Barack Obama administration. Blocked so far are Dawn Johnsen, who has been prevented from assuming her post at the all-important Office of Legal Counsel, and Harold Koh, whom Obama appointed to the State Department.


Schumer, who sits on the Judiciary, Finance and Banking Committees and chairs the Senate Rules Committee, professes to see no legitimate reason why either nominee should face even the slightest Republican resistance. Thus he is forced to conclude, he tells us with wistful disappointment, that Republicans are simply a party of anachronisms who “have nothing positive to say,” who have been rejected by the American people, and who thus can derive satisfaction only from playing the role of spoiled-brat contrarians.


Says Schumer, “The hard Right, which still believes … in ‘traditional values’ kind of arguments and ‘strong foreign policy,’ all that’s over.”


Ah, those pesky Republicans! Imagine the nerve they have—objecting, for no good reason on earth, to the nomination of Dawn Johnsen, who unequivocally supports the notion that all women in the United States should have a right to taxpayer-funded abortion-on-demand at any point in their pregnancy, for any reason whatsoever; who has stated that any ban on federal funding for abortion is akin to the enslavement of pregnant women and thus constitutes a violation of the Thirteenth Amendment; who believes that nominees for the federal judiciary should automatically be disqualified from consideration if they don’t view the Constitution as a “living document” subject to the reinterpretation of activist judges; and who views the War on Terror as an ill-advised overreaction to 9/11.


And imagine, further, the nerve of those petulant Republicans who inexplicably object to the nomination of Harold Koh, who has publicly criticized the U.S. for its “obsessive focus on the War on Terror”; who has accused the U.S. of violating human rights on a grand scale; who advocates a form of “global governance” that would supersede the authority of the U.S. Constitution; and who has derided the Patriot Act as one of America’s many anti-terror efforts that have sullied the nation’s image abroad.


Poor Charles Schumer. Why should he and his fellow Democrats have to put up with these irritating, obstructive Republican tactics? Why don’t those pesky Republicans just go away?

Be Sociable, Share!
No comments yet

Leave a Reply

Note: You can use basic XHTML in your comments. Your email address will never be published.

Subscribe to this comment feed via RSS

Copyright 2019 NewsReal Blog

The Theme Foundry