Only Catholic Males Need Apply – Bush Picks “Scalito”
Well, so much for diversity. So much for putting another woman on the court. And after Rove put so much work into convincing Hispanics that they are welcome in the GOP, how can Hispanics not feel used and lied to by George W. Bush?
Given the second chance to name a woman of substance who would have met Sandra Day O’Connor’s request that female representation not be lessened by the selection of her successor, Bush instead went backwards and chose another Catholic male for the Supreme Court when he named Samuel Alito of the 3rd Circuit as his second-best choice for the vacant slot on the high court. And if Harriet Miers was the best person he could find, what does that make Alito, who is just another male who feels wives derive their rights from their husbands? Alito, you see, feels that wives need to notify their husbands before they obtain an abortion. Alito has views different from O’Connor on the issue of reproductive freedom and the rights of wives, and that is reason enough to really draw him out in the coming weeks. Alito also feels that female employees should have a harder time avoiding summary judgement in a claim for sexual discrimination against an employer, and that the courts should take the employer's word for their behavior.
If Bush has his way, we would now have five Catholic males on the high court. When exactly did the Vatican take over the United States legal system? There weren’t any conservatives of other faiths available for Bush’s second-best choice here? And if Bush is so good for women, exactly why did Bush pass over not once, not twice, but three times women jurists like Karen Williams and Edith Clement?
Simply put, Bush went with another Scalia with this pick, and Democrats should make it clear to voters what Bush is trying to do: make wives into second-class citizens. Let's be clear here: Joseph Ratzenberger is not picking our judges, nor is James Dobson. The American people are.