democrats endeavor for nothing so ardently as they do in their search for something by which to be offended. If that something happens to be a tool used to batter the political opposition so much the better.
Today’s example is represented by dem Sens. Kamala Harris and Mazie Hirono. The two of them demonstrate how the power of stupidity can be multiplied when combined instead of the just added. They have concluded that being Catholic can lead to a fatal flaw which fatally compromises one’s ability to sit as a Federal judge. That flaw? Joining a group known for its hatred, fascism and racism.
The Knights of Columbus.
A judicial nominee faced questions from Senators this month about whether membership in the Knights of Columbus might impede his ability to judge federal cases fairly. The Knights of Columbus say that no candidate for public office should have to defend his membership in a Catholic service organization.
Senators Mazie Hirono (D-HI) and Kamala Harris (D-CA) raised concerns about membership in the Knights of Columbus while the Senate Judiciary Committee reviewed the candidacy of Brian C. Buescher, an Omaha-based lawyer nominated by President Trump to sit on the United States District Court for the District of Nebraska.
Senators also asked whether belonging to the Catholic charitable organization could prevent judges from hearing cases “fairly and impartially.”
In written questions sent to Buescher by committee members Dec. 5, Sen. Hirono stated that “the Knights of Columbus has taken a number of extreme positions. For example, it was reportedly one of the top contributors to California’s Proposition 8 campaign to ban same-sex marriage.”
Hirono then asked Buescher if he would quit the group if he was confirmed “to avoid any appearance of bias.”
Buescher responded appropriately
“If confirmed, I will apply all provisions of the Code of Conduct for United States Judges regarding recusal and disqualification,”
It is one more attack on the Catholic religion:
Kathleen Blomquist, spokesperson for the Knights of Columbus, told CNA that the senators’ questions echoed the kind of anti-Catholicism seen in previous generations of American history.
“Our country’s sad history of anti-Catholic bigotry contributed to the founding of the Knights of Columbus, and we are proud of the many Catholics who overcame this hurdle to contribute so greatly to our country,” Blomquist told CNA
“We were extremely disappointed to see that one’s commitment to Catholic principles through membership in the Knights of Columbus—a charitable organization that adheres to and promotes Catholic teachings—would be viewed as a disqualifier from public service in this day and age.”
The Knights have a long and proud record of social service:
The Knights of Columbus is active in 17 countries worldwide. In 2017, members carried out more than 75 million hours of volunteer work and raised more than $185 million for charitable purposes. Successive popes, including Pope Francis, have praisied the group for their charitable work and the manner in which they articulate Catholic faith and values.
Contrast that to the Clinton Foundation, which services no one more than the Clinton’s- or any democrat for that matter.
Cory Booker, who is always in a hyperventilating emotional state, had to mark his territory:
Senator Cory Booker (D-NJ) noted the nominee’s previously outspoken opposition to abortion and asked “why should a litigant in your courtroom expect to get a fair hearing from an impartial judge in a case involving abortion rights?”
Buescher responded that “as a candidate for Nebraska Attorney General in 2014, I did what candidates for any major state or federal office do, which is to take political positions on a variety of issues of the day.”
“However, there is a difference between taking political positions as a candidate for elective office and serving as a federal judge. I believe a judge’s role and obligation is to apply the law without regard to any personal beliefs regarding the law,” Buescher wrote.
“If confirmed, I will faithfully apply all United States Supreme Court and Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals precedent on all issues, including Roe v. Wade.”
It’s good to recall that Kamala Harris launched her career in the boudoir of Willie Harris:
Harris’ big break in her political career came after dating Willie Brown, a powerful former California Assembly speaker and mayor of San Francisco. She became the District Attorney of San Francisco before running and narrowly winning the race for state attorney general in 2010 in an election that was possibly tainted by voter fraud and wasn’t decided until nearly three weeks later.
Inside of Mazie Hirono a battle rages- one between ignorance and stupidity.
All of this could be seen as the usual democrat blather with the Catholic religion falling into the cross hairs, but there is a reason for that.
This is a dress rehearsal for the next victim of their vituperation: Amy Coney Barrett.
DrJohn has been a health care professional for more than 30 years. In addition to clinical practice he has done extensive research and has published widely with over 70 original articles and abstracts in the peer-reviewed literature. DrJohn is well known in his field and has lectured on every continent except for Antarctica. He has been married to the same wonderful lady for over 30 years and has three kids- two sons, both of whom are attorneys and one daughter on her way into the field of education.
DrJohn was brought up with the concept that one can do well if one is prepared to work hard but nothing in life is guaranteed.
Except for liberals being foolish.
Article VI of the U.S. Constitution plainly states, “no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.”
Interestingly, THE VERY SAME SENTENCE earlier says, “The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution”
So, the two senators are doubly violating the U.S. Constitution by their questions.
@Barry Sullivan:
Good point, but these are democrats and are, by nature, amoral as I shall soon emphasize.
http://www.intellectualconservative.com/kamala-harris-will-never-be-president/
@John Velisek: Excellent article. I pray you’re right, John, but it your article appears to be a treatise on exactly why liberals would vote for her.
Maybe Whore Harris and Man-Hater Hirono should read this. But, as you say, mere laws don’t mean much to liberals. Of course, if someone was an ardent supporter of abortion, anti-2nd Amendment and supports illegal immigration and pledge to do all they can to promote them, they would be a liberal shoo-in.
Well, there you go. WRONG. Personal and ideological beliefs should be the sole guidance of a judge, as long as it is LIBERAL.
My oldest brother is a Knight. They recently traveled to Mexico to distribute wheel chairs to people who need them but cannot afford them. Not a nickel of support for that came from the Clinton Foundation, I can assure you.
So now being a Catholic is bad?
Bad Pelosi!
Bad Biden!
Bad Supreme Court Justices John Roberts,
Samuel Alito,
Anthony Kennedy,
Antonin Scalia,
Sonia Sotomayor and
Clarence Thomas!
Bad Kennedys, JFK, RFK and Teddy, too.
Good call on a third Supreme Court pick by Pres Trump, tho.
I don’t care how the lefty media wants to spin it, when a lung cancer emerges, on its own, it creates ONE, not TWO nodules.
The fact that RBG had TWO that they wouldn’t have even looked for, had she not fallen and broke ribs, tells me her doctors knew her old cancer is back.
I am sorry to say she is probably beyond human help for her cancer at this time.
The nodules were simply a symptom, not the main event.
@Nan G: Well, liberal “Catholics” still put their ideology before God. They simply don’t want to lose the votes associated with denouncing the religion of their youth.
@John Velisek: Why is there no mention in that link of the fact that Harris is NOT eligible to be president. She is NOT a natural born citizen.
@DrJohn: Why does no one mention the fact that Harris is NOT eligible to be president. She is NOT a natural born citizen.
@Nan G: True, it’s the 3rd area of her body that has been acknowledged to have cancer. It sounds as if it’s metastasized and is in several areas. I would not wish that situation on anyone, but it’s doubtful that she will survive much longer. They said removal from the lungs was complete. I’d say not likely. In any case, she’s not going to be doing much judging for the remainder of her life.
@Redteam:
Justice Ginsburg voted against the stay from the hospital.
Disgraceful.
@Deplorable Me: “Whore Harris”? “Man-Hater Hirono”? What is it with you guys and name-calling? Don’t you realize that name-calling is a kid thing?
@Redteam: She was born in Oakland.
@Barry Sullivan: Are you referring to Kommiela Hairass, the person that has zero use for the Constitution and shown over and over by her actions in Kommieforniastan?
@Michael: I guess it comes from a constant drone of being called “racist”, “misogynist”, “homophobic”, “deplorable”, anti-immigrant”, “fascist” or whatever else is employed to try and end a debate. At least my labels are accurate.
@Deplorable Me: It sounds like you can’t take responsibility for your own actions.
@Michael: Is that what it sounds like to you? What does people calling other people a racist or some other invective when they simply can’t keep up in an argument due to weak minds? If you would notice, I stated that my characterization of them was inaccurate, which would seem to MOST people like taking responsibility for my actions.
@Deplorable Me: Well, first of all, when you write “At least my labels are accurate,” that’s the opposite of saying that your “characterization of them was inaccurate,” so it’s not clear what point you’re trying to make.
Second, you’re blaming somebody else’s shittiness for your shittiness: getting called names somehow forced you into a similar act of childishness. That’s the excuse a little kid would give.
Go ahead and be childish; just own up to it.
@Michael:
I didn’t know I was conversing with a moron. In that respect, I don’t know how to help you.
Actually, no. I’m not blaming anyone for anything. I am stating FACTS (in both cases). Harris is a whore, Hirono is a man-hater and the left has destroyed civil discourse by reverting to using labels and name-calling when they begin to lose the argument (usually within the first few sentences). So, if you don’t object to that aspect, why would you object to the accurate descriptions I offered of these two bags of trash?
@Deplorable Me:
You could explain what you meant.
First, you have no idea what I have or have not objected to in the past. Second, none of that would have anything to do with your decision to call people names.
This twisting and squirming and finger-pointing and general evasiveness is not what I’d expect from a mature adult.
@Michael: Speaking of squirming, you certainly do some to pretend to avoid the point, displaying a total lack of any defense of these sluts who want a religious test for judges.
@Deplorable Me: I’m not defending them, and that upsets you? Correct me if I’m wrong, but you’re not defending them either, right? You disagree with what they’re doing, right? Then why the hell are you upset that I’m not defending them?
@Michael: Doesn’t upset me that liberals are lying hypocrites and I guess it takes one to defend and support one.
@Deplorable Me: I’m defending and supporting them by–what?–my act of not defending and supporting them?
@Michael: Defending them by questioning my characterization of their actions. Have you changed your mind and agree I am correct?
@Deplorable Me: I’m questioning your name-calling. You can disagree with what they’re doing without calling them names.
@Michael: You are defending and supporting them. Those aren’t names, they are accurate descriptions of people who seek to damage this country.
@Deplorable Me: An adult should be able to disagree with someone without resorting to name-calling.
@Michael: Oh? Will liberals be abiding by that guideline anytime soon? If so, be sure to let me know.
@Deplorable Me: How are liberals in control of your behavior?
@Michael: They don’t. They only control your behavior. They compel you to defend these hacks, which makes you look ridiculous and without credibility.