When I have conversations with my liberal friends (fewer and fewer, as they prove their intolerance by not talking to me anymore when they find out I am conservative, so much for freedom of speech and diversity of opinion)about Janice Rogers Brown, here is what I get: talking points from moveon.org or People for the
1. She represents ideological extremism
2. she is (the biggest irony of all) an aggressive judicial activist (had a good chuckle over that one)
3. Even further to the right than the most far right justices.
4. prone to inserting conservative political views into her appellate opinions
5. has many 'disturbing' dissents
6. (more projection from libs)a distrubing tendency to try to remake the law
7. takes extreme states rights and ant-federal government positions
8. working to push the law far to the right
Go look it up at the website. Unless they have taken it down. Here is what they don't provide you with: details. What cases had 'disturbing' dissents? How exactly is she a judicial activist? Is her inserting of conservative thought into opinions any different from Justice Kennedy inserting international opinion and humanist thought into his opinions? WHERE IS THE SPECIFICITY?
Answer--there is none. The closest they can get to her being "far right" is an exchange she had with Patrick "leaky" Leahy:
Leahy: But do you find a right to privacy in the Constituion?And she is right. There is no stated right to privacy in the text of the document. However, to Leftys, this means, egads, she will overturn Roe v. Wade! Clutch the pearls! Thankfully, Orrin Hatch clarified the issue in the same hearing, he was chair of the committee at the time:
Brown: Do I find it in the text of the Constitution, the US Constitution? No.
Hatch: Just to clarify...You said ou did not find the right to privacy in the express language of the Constituion.
Brown: That is correct.
Hatch: Nobody can find it there.
Brown: Nobody can find it there.
Hatch: But, do you agree there is a right to privacy that has now been established by the Supreme Court in Griswold and---"
Brown: It is clearly established by the Supreme Court. That is the law."
Hatch: Do you accept it?
Brown: Certainly
So, Brown will respect the law. I wish more Lefty judges would. So, we don't have specifics of how she is so wrong for America other than petty charges...So, what else is there: Janice Rogers Brown is black, and would put another huge dent into the liberal myth of blacks can't be successful without government help or by selling out to whitey.
Here are the facts of the matter:
Janice Rogers Brown was born the daughter of sharecroppers in 1949 in Alabama. She rose from a segregated and poor childhood in the South to earn a law degree from UCLA, and she was a single mother to boot (boy, no wonder the feminists have joined the Dims in this crusade, a single mother who worked three jobs to get a degree, who didn't demand to be held up as a victim, darn!)
Judge Brown is brilliant but plainspoken, she is dedicated to preserving the Constitution as ratified and is a champion of limited government. This is again, kryptonite to the Sharptons and Jesse Jacksons and Quesi Mfumes of the Left. Egads, a black woman who can take care of herself and doesn't blame whitey! Perish the thought.
And before they say she was sheltered in a conservative state, let's look at where she is from: CALIFORNIA! Liberal Hollywood land. Here are some notes to show the level of bipartisan respect this woman has:
1998 retention vote--won 76% of the vote
In the same vote, San Francisco voters approved of her with a 79.4% vote
She won more votes statewide than ANY of the other three judges up for reelection--IN LIBERAL BY GOD CALIFORNIA--even thouh she cast a minority vote to try to uphold the state's parental consent law.
It comes down to this: Brown is a woman who doesn't go giddy over abortion. She is also black. Because she is black and conservative, that makes her evil. The Senate Lefties are showing their own prejudice when they seek to hold her nomination up. They are showing it is about her race and her non-feminist views. That, quite simply, is sexist, racist, and bigoted. But that is all the Dims have left.
