Fruitless Tree Bears Fruit... Finally
About once or twice a month, sometimes twice a week certain political issues arise and I have a hard time keeping my mouth shut. Normally I just unleash a diatribe of immature insults in the direction of president@whitehouse.gov (side note: If I disappear soon, it may be because it’s illegal to call the president a baby-killing pig-fucker.)
A few months ago, I stopped writing carefully crafted and thoughtfully edited arguments to support my political opinions in my correspondence with our nation's Village Idiot. I'm not sure what I expected to happen-- actually, I didn't expect anything to happen. Then one day I got some bull-shit form email in response to some issue I had written to the President about. That pissed me off. I was okay with the probability that my comments will simply go unread, and most likely get filtered off into some top-secret email trash bin. I did not, however, want confirmation of that assumption. That was just insulting. So now I just write and call him names. It actually feels pretty good. I would recommend it to anyone who can't afford therapy.
Anyway, I also frequently write to the Senate and Congress. They actually write back! Normally, they just write back to tell me why they vote/believe/support what they do, and why, and then effectively and very politely (in not as many words) tell me to go fuck my liberal and insignificant self. Then they always thank me for my thoughts and opinions. How sweet of them.
So, about a month ago, I wrote to Senator Hutchinson (R-Texas) about some fascist, brainless, irritating drone that Bush was trying to appoint to the federal bench. I expressed my opinions, stated my reasons, and did so as politely and eloquently as I could. This is Senator Hutchinson's thoughtful reply:
Dear Ms. Dugger: Thank you for contacting me regarding the nomination of Leon Holmes. I welcome your thoughts and comments on this issue.
Dr. J. Leon Holmes was nominated on January 29, 2003, by President Bush to serve on the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas and confirmed by the Senate on July 6, 2004.
Since President Bush took office in 2001, I have voted to confirm 197 of his 198 nominations that have reached the Senate floor. I am gratified he has seated a number of judges with conservative backgrounds, because none were appointed during the eight years President Clinton was in office. I am particularly pleased when a nominee has a strong religious foundation as well as a deep respect for the rule of law. On the rare occasion when I have opposed a judicial candidate during my time in the Senate, it was because the nominee failed to show the proper judicial temperament or, if questions about judicial philosophy arose, there was no judicial record on which to base a vote of confidence.
I take seriously my responsibility to advise and consent on individuals nominated for lifetime appointments to the bench. Federal judges do not answer to the people after they take office, and when Senators make a mistake, the results can be devastating. When a nominee's views raise a question or concern, and there is no record as a judge to show he or she can set aside personal views, I believe caution is warranted.
I am convinced Dr. Holmes is a gifted man and capable attorney, with a strong career and commitment to his community. His rich spiritual conviction and work ethic are to be commended. However, after meeting personally with Dr. Holmes, reviewing a number of his public writings and statements, and listening to his supporters, I reluctantly decided that he lacks a fundamental commitment to the equality of women in our society. My vote against Dr. Holmes was not in any way related to his views on abortion or his personal religious beliefs. It was based on his body of statements over a 25-year period that led me to conclude he does not possess the judicial temperament necessary for a lifetime appointment to the federal bench.
I appreciate hearing from you and hope you will not hesitate to keep in touch on any issue of concern to you. Sincerely,
Kay Bailey Hutchison
KBH:cfh
A few months ago, I stopped writing carefully crafted and thoughtfully edited arguments to support my political opinions in my correspondence with our nation's Village Idiot. I'm not sure what I expected to happen-- actually, I didn't expect anything to happen. Then one day I got some bull-shit form email in response to some issue I had written to the President about. That pissed me off. I was okay with the probability that my comments will simply go unread, and most likely get filtered off into some top-secret email trash bin. I did not, however, want confirmation of that assumption. That was just insulting. So now I just write and call him names. It actually feels pretty good. I would recommend it to anyone who can't afford therapy.
Anyway, I also frequently write to the Senate and Congress. They actually write back! Normally, they just write back to tell me why they vote/believe/support what they do, and why, and then effectively and very politely (in not as many words) tell me to go fuck my liberal and insignificant self. Then they always thank me for my thoughts and opinions. How sweet of them.
So, about a month ago, I wrote to Senator Hutchinson (R-Texas) about some fascist, brainless, irritating drone that Bush was trying to appoint to the federal bench. I expressed my opinions, stated my reasons, and did so as politely and eloquently as I could. This is Senator Hutchinson's thoughtful reply:
Dear Ms. Dugger: Thank you for contacting me regarding the nomination of Leon Holmes. I welcome your thoughts and comments on this issue.
Dr. J. Leon Holmes was nominated on January 29, 2003, by President Bush to serve on the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas and confirmed by the Senate on July 6, 2004.
Since President Bush took office in 2001, I have voted to confirm 197 of his 198 nominations that have reached the Senate floor. I am gratified he has seated a number of judges with conservative backgrounds, because none were appointed during the eight years President Clinton was in office. I am particularly pleased when a nominee has a strong religious foundation as well as a deep respect for the rule of law. On the rare occasion when I have opposed a judicial candidate during my time in the Senate, it was because the nominee failed to show the proper judicial temperament or, if questions about judicial philosophy arose, there was no judicial record on which to base a vote of confidence.
I take seriously my responsibility to advise and consent on individuals nominated for lifetime appointments to the bench. Federal judges do not answer to the people after they take office, and when Senators make a mistake, the results can be devastating. When a nominee's views raise a question or concern, and there is no record as a judge to show he or she can set aside personal views, I believe caution is warranted.
I am convinced Dr. Holmes is a gifted man and capable attorney, with a strong career and commitment to his community. His rich spiritual conviction and work ethic are to be commended. However, after meeting personally with Dr. Holmes, reviewing a number of his public writings and statements, and listening to his supporters, I reluctantly decided that he lacks a fundamental commitment to the equality of women in our society. My vote against Dr. Holmes was not in any way related to his views on abortion or his personal religious beliefs. It was based on his body of statements over a 25-year period that led me to conclude he does not possess the judicial temperament necessary for a lifetime appointment to the federal bench.
I appreciate hearing from you and hope you will not hesitate to keep in touch on any issue of concern to you. Sincerely,
Kay Bailey Hutchison
KBH:cfh
posted by abbiapple at 10:21 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home