Those of you who read the articles that appear on this site know that I seldom refer to myself, and generally write from an objective and factual point of view. However, at the outset of this article, it is necessary for me to abandon objectivity to a degree and speak directly to Mr. Schumer, not that he will read this article or that I entertain illusions that he shall do so.

Dear Mr. Schumer, having read and listened to your diatribes and attempts at being intelligent, it is painfully obvious that you are a another  wacko liberal with no understanding of your role relative to the Constitution and that is true simply because you don’t understand the document (your work in the Senate is proof), and if you do, you are deliberately denying your oath of office, playing to the leftist crowd for partisan political gain.

You said (quote): "We should reverse the presumption of confirmation,” [Schumer said in a speech to  the American Constitution Society Convention in Washington, as reported in The Politico.] The Supreme Court is dangerously out of balance. We cannot afford to see Justice Stevens replaced by another Roberts, or Justice Ginsburg by another Alito.” (Unquote) What you mean sir is that there aren’t enough liberals like Ginsberg, Breyer, Souter, and Stephens on the court so that your unconstitutional, socialist (Communist) ideology can be pushed off on us at every turn.

Sir, the founders of this nation weren’t concerned with ideological balance and didn’t entertain any notion that one system was as good as another. In fact, they discarded every system except the one we have, a constitutional republic, which I dare say, you do not regard in the slightest due to your party’s agenda and your socialist mind, both of which are identical. The only balance we need is for the court to follow the Constitution as it is written, using the words and sentence structure that set forth the original intent and meaning.

As for the confirmation of the nominees for judgeship, the only criterion should and must be that they will follow the Constitution in the mold of Justices Alito, Thomas, Scalia, and Roberts. I can now see the hackles rising on your neck since that is the last thing you want and have so stated. You know as well as I that such men can and will and have put a stop to your schemes to install ungodly, immoral socialism (Communism) in this nation. What you and your ilk in Congress cannot do (installing more socialistic schemes) because the people won’t allow it, you know that the court’s liberals (when a majority) will do so under the false dictum of “their rulings are the law of the land.” Point of fact Mr. Schumer: The Constitution does not give the justices (or judges) the power to make any law. The duty is to rule according to existing laws as long as they are constitutional and to honor the original intent of the Constitution when the rulings are made.

Dana Perino said relative to your conduct, “That is the sign of a bully.” And I add the words “of the worst kind” in the mold of FDR. He tried to bully Congress into packing the court with his kind so that the New Deal Programs would be ruled constitutional. Now with your intended refusal to not confirm the President’s nominees, you are trying to pack the court(s) with your ideological buddies by refusing to confirm honorable men. The conclusion is that your method is no different than FDR’s scheme and the result will be courts with no more respect for the Constitution than you and your ilk hold.

As a nation we are suffering from your stupid partisanship and liberal socialistic (Communistic) ways. You and your party only care about the Constitution and the courts when they stand in the way of your nefarious ideas and agendas. Hopefully, the next time you are due for election the people of your state will send you packing, but that is wishful thinking.

For those who might say that this article is disrespectful, I’ll use the following Bible verse Romans 13:7 Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour. Mr. Schumer you have no honor except from those of your ilk. In Sorting It Out, it is very plain that you deserve no honor of any kind from freedom and liberty loving people.

© 07-28-2007 DE Source links are below.  

(http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2007/7/27/225755.shtml?s=ic    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0707/5146.html)