Obama Filibustered Justice Alito, Voted Against Roberts

Frontpage: Obama and his media allies are now making all the expected noises about the Senate’s obligation to confirm nominees if they’re qualified without partisan interference. That is the exact opposite of what he did to Bush’s Supreme Court nominees.

Let’s start with Justice Roberts.

Obama admitted that Roberts was eminently qualified. He praised him highly.

“There is absolutely no doubt in my mind Judge Roberts is qualified to sit on the highest court in the land. Moreover, he seems to have the comportment and the temperament that makes for a good judge. He is humble, he is personally decent, and he appears to be respectful of different points of view. It is absolutely clear to me that Judge Roberts truly loves the law. He couldn’t have achieved his excellent record as an advocate before the Supreme Court without that passion for the law…”

But, no he wasn’t going to vote for him anyway.

“I ultimately have to give more weight to his deeds and the overarching political philosophy that he appears to have shared with those in power than to the assuring words that he provided me in our meeting. The bottom line is this: I will be voting against John Roberts’ nomination.”

In short, Obama chose to vote against Roberts because of his perceived conservative politics. Nothing else.

When Obama now prattles about the need to get past partisanship, he is preaching what he doesn’t practice, what he has never practiced and what he especially did not practice in that same situation.

However things really got ugly with the nomination of Justice Alito.

 

Obama joined a filibuster when he was a U.S. senator to delay the confirmation of Judge Samuel Alito, one of President Bush’s nominees to the Supreme Court.

“I will be supporting the filibuster because I think Judge Alito, in fact, is somebody who is contrary to core American values, not just liberal values,” Obama said in January 2006.

Obama has no idea what American values are. His only values are leftist values. Here’s what he said about Justice Alito.

“While I certainly believe that Judge Samuel Alito has the training and the qualifications necessary to serve as a Supreme Court Justice,after a careful review of his record, I simply cannot vote for his nomination.”

Obama claimed that, “Judge Alito simply does not inspire confidence that he will serve as an independent voice on the U.S. Supreme Court.”

Meanwhile once in the White House, Obama nominated Elena Kagan, his own lawyer for that “independent voice”. So once again, Obama fought against a justice for no other reason than his politics.

Here’s what Senator Obama had to say about the Senate’s role in confirming nominees.

“There are some who believe that the President, having won the election, should have the complete authority to appoint his nominee, and the Senate should only examine whether or not the Justice is intellectually capable and an all-around nice guy. That once you get beyond intellect and personal character, there should be no further question whether the judge should be confirmed.

I disagree with this view. I believe firmly that the Constitution calls for the Senate to advise and consent. I believe that it calls for meaningful advice and consent that includes an examination of a judge’s philosophy, ideology, and record. And when I examine the philosophy, ideology, and record of Samuel Alito, I’m deeply troubled.

I have no doubt that Judge Alito has the training and qualifications necessary to serve. He’s an intelligent man and an accomplished jurist. And there’s no indication he’s not a man of great character.”

Again, ideology is key. And as Senator, Obama insisted that the Senate should examine a nominee’s ideology and that confirmation should not be expected or anticipated.

****

FLASHBACK: In 2007, Schumer Called For Blocking All Bush Supreme Court Nominations

 DailyCaller: During a Sunday morning appearance on ABC’s “This Week,” Democratic Sen. Charles Schumer decried the intent of many Senate Republicans to prevent President Barack Obama from appointing the successor to deceased Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia.But less than a decade ago, Schumer advocated doing the same exact thing if any additional Supreme Court vacancies opened under former President George W. Bush.

Almost immediately after Scalia’s death was announced Saturday evening, Republican lawmakers and presidential candidates began arguing the appointment of his successor should be left to the next president. Schumer lamented this outlook as pure obstructionism.

“You know, the kind of obstructionism that [Senate Majority Leader] Mitch McConnell ‘s talking about, he’s hearkening back to his old days,” Schumer said, according to The Hill. “In 2010, right after the election or right during the election, he said, ‘My number-one job is to defeat Barack Obama,’ without even knowing what Barack Obama was going to propose. Here, he doesn’t even know who the president’s going to propose and he said, ‘No, we’re not having hearings; we’re not going to go forward to leave the Supreme Court vacant at 300 days in a divided time.’”

****

Don’t leave out Hillary, she got a plan from David Brock to impeach Clarence Thomas:

TWS: Hillary Clinton’s recently released emails includes a memo sent by David Brock titled, “Memo on Impeaching Clarence Thomas.”

The purpose of the document might suggest Clinton, or at least those closest to her and in her circle, are interested in impeaching Justice Thomas.

The document contains information from Brock about his book, The Real Anita Hill, and other similar points on Justice Thomas’s personal life