If She Doesn't Answer the Questions Then Vote No
If She Doesn't Answer the Questions Then The Vote is No
By Angie Pratt
If George Bush's pick to replace Sandra Day O'Conner does not answer the questions that the Senators put to her, then the vote on her nomination must be “no”.
We, the people of the United States, deserve to know what a Supreme Court nominee thinks about basic principals of freedom before he/she is confirmed. This is a life time appointment and, as citizens, we have a right to know where a nominee stands philosophically on issues. While there are political consequences, the issue of whether or not the nominee answers the questions is not a political charade.
Citizens also have the right to hold their elected officials accountable for how they vote. If a court nominee does not represent mainstream American values it is our representatives in the Senate's obligation to vote against that person.
An automatic yes vote when there is no information upon which to make a judgement is also unacceptable. We do not take pigs in a poke. We do not accept personal integrity claims in lieu of factual knowledge of how that person stands on matters of importance.
So … it all boils down to whether or not Harriet Miers has the guts to stand on her own two feet and clearly state what her personal beliefs are.
If she does so and those beliefs are acceptable then she should receive confirmation. On the other hand, if she refuses to state her beliefs and/or those beliefs are unacceptable to mainstream Americans then she should not be confirmed.
Being a crony of George Bush is not justification for a yes confirmation vote. Cronyism, the Peter Principal and blank checks go hand in hand down the path of incompetence and fiscal and moral bankruptcy.
I expect liberals and moderates to take a clear stand on this. I expect them to uphold my right to know whom they are putting into the Supreme Court. I demand that the Senate of the United States Of American confirm only some one who holds my civil liberties in as high a regard as I do.
I also expect far right wing conservatives to take a stand on this as well. They will argue against my rights. They will argue that the ends justify the means. They will denigrate me in an attempt to make my demand to know appear to be unreasonable.
Well, in this case, I know that I do not stand alone. The people of the United States understand that if they allow the Supreme Court to be dominated by extremists that their own civil rights will be at risk.
The Bush Administration has over reached itself again by a nominating some one who clearly is an elitist who has never had to face the concept that her own personal civil rights might be in jeopardy. That happens when you are part of the ruling class.
And, if this means that there is a full filibuster of this nominee then so be. And if this means that the Republicans carry through on their threat to delete the right to filibuster then so be it.
Because, frankly my dear, I do give a damn. And… the line is drawn in the sand.