Sen. Lindsey Graham: Justice Ginsberg OK'd Child Sex
Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg once argued that girls as young as twelve should be able to have sex with adult males, Sen. Lindsey Graham said Tuesday - while pledging to make an issue out of Ginsberg's radical philosophy during John Roberts' confirmation hearings. "She argued that the age of consent for a woman should be twelve," Graham told ABC Radio host Sean Hannity.
"She wasn't representing clients," Graham noted about Ginsberg's endorsement of child sex. "She was writing an article about her own views."
Other radical left positions advocated by Justice Ginsberg, outlined by Senator Graham:
The legalization of prostitution
Coed prisons for men and women
Polygamy may be a constitutionally protected right
Federal funding for abortion
Said Sen. Graham: "[She argued for] a lot of things that are so far out of the mainstream that if a conservative took her writings as a test, not her qualifications, she wouldn't have gotten one conservative vote," said Graham.
"She had personal views that I find just laughable - but she got 96 votes by the U.S. Senate," he added.
Graham said that if the Roberts' confirmation hearings grows more contentious, "I'm gonna paint Justice Ginsberg as being as far out of the mainstream as you can possibly get."
Ginsburg's views are way outside the mainstream. Of course, to a liberal, everything they think is mainstream...like federal funding to kill babies.
Yet she still was confirmed with 96 votes. Lets see how liberals act on Roberts.
The good thing is the American people get to see how liberals oppose things most Americans agree with...as they fight Roberts, they lose more and more ground with reality.
Wednesday, September 14, 2005
Exactly my point
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
19 comments:
If these perported views are so abhorrent, why didn't the Republicans do their job and let the American public know about them during her hearings?
Legalizing prostitution is kind of a libertarian position, isn't it? Federal funding for abortion? What's radical left about that? If abortion is a healthcare issue, and sometimes it can be, any female in the armed forces should be eligible for a federally funded abortion. That would be supporting the troops.
Federal funding for "killing babies"? What is that all about? I've never heard of any federal funding for "killing babies."
It has been well known that Justice Ginzburg has held these views since before her confirmation to the bench.
Before she was appointed to the SCOTUS she was a lawyer for the ACLU. They are notorius for advocating any and everything that is moral.
WHAT!!!!!!!! The ACLU????
they defend child molesters, illegal immigrants...and during the winter they try and sue Santa Clause...I can't believe what I have just heard.
AHHHHHHH!!! This is why John Kerry got votes. The public is Helen Keller when it comes to issues of real importance, Deaf, Blind and Mute.
The ACLU is a criminal organization bent on pushing a progressive social agenda through use of the judicial system. As The Game said they support everything that IS NOT Conservative America. Supporting abortion, removing God from schools, and defending terrorism are no the acts of a moral institution.
Abortion is never a medical issue. What do you think of that wacky liberal nutjob. You find me a case of abortion where that abortion prevented the death of the mother and I will find you tens of thousands that were done "just because". If it helps you to sleep better at night kowing that baby killing is done every time to save the mother than you go ahead and live in your little box of ignorance. For the rest of the world it is judicial murder developed from a loopy left-wing interpretation of the constitution based on privacy, not health care.
damn he is good.
Jim, Jim, Jim.
Thank you, Average Joe, for explaining things to Jim.
Game, I heard Graham on Hannity, too. I knew Ginsburg was the ACLU lawyer, but I didn't know about her belief that twelve is an appropriate age of consent.
UNBELIEVABLE!!!!
Or they defend Rush Limbaugh.
A majority of the people in this country believe that abortion should be legal in some circumstances. So according to you, a majority of people in this country support "murder." Could it be that people all over the world do not agree with your definition of murder or "babies". Doesn't mean they are right and you are wrong. Means that regardless of how you feel, it is not black and white, not a universal truth.
Doctors, mothers, and the government recognize intact dilation and extraction as a legal procedure, so by definition it is not murder.
Average Joe, can you tell you are being ignored? I don't have to take any of your shit. And I won't.
Well, liberals can only argue with emotion...Jim was doing a decent job making his point...then that emotion and hate had to come in...
It happens most often when they lose an argument badly.
most people do not understand that there are almost no, if not no, abortions that happen to save the life of the mother...if they did know that, the number of people supporting abortion for that reason would go down to zero percent. Only 28% of people support abortion all the time...and yes...partial birth abortion is murder..
So Jim and the other liberals, why does your party support stabbing babies in the back of the head as they are being born? Can't we at least get rid of that..
Then we can have an intelligent discussion on if or when life begins.
What's with Lindsey? He was one of the "Gang of 7, Rhinos" who stuck it to Bush's appeals court nominees.
Has he come to his senses? Or is he in on the fix? --> What fix you ask?
You watch, McCain and the rest of the 7 are going to give Bush everything he wants with these SCOTUS appointments....They are going to break the Filibuster of the second appointee --> And make no mistake, the wingbats are going to filibuster no matter who Bush puts up.
They are going to do this, because Bush is going to support McCain's presidential bid in 08'.
Just remember you heard it hear first.
Game,
I don't hate, and I don't spew hate. My comment was made in reference to someone who chooses to debate by calling somebody a "wacky liberal nutjob." Is this the kind of dialog you want on your blog, Game? Have I ever called you or anybody else a name?
If you want to hear only one voice, one side of the debate here, fine. But if you do, why don't you just stand in front of the mirror and talk to yourself.
Now where exactly is it that I "only argue with emotion"? I argue with passion, perhaps, but my arguments are logical and valid. I may not be correct, and I certainly may not agree with everyone here, but I'm not calling anybody names and I'm not using emotion as a point of debate. It seems like others here are.
There are a lot of people in this country who don't feel the same way you do, perhaps a majority of people. Do you write off anybody who disagrees with you? Because there are a lot of Christians who disagree with some of your positions.
If you think there are no abortions to save the life of the mother, then you don't know what you are talking about. My mother had an abortion because she was told that she faced a high risk of death giving birth.
didn't say any...but not many
I like it very much that you come here, and hope you continue..
I might have called you insane, but not a nutjob..
if someone else did, that is there right...I am sorry, I am not going to restrict any speech here...sorry if you don't like it.
I believe that is the only way to be truely "tolerant"
Scorpion says--
Unfortunately there are fewer"AVERAGE JOE'S" every day as America's greatest generation ages and are replaced by far too many "U.W.'s" who just don't have any real perspective. Still, it is very amusing to see the bizarre ideas side by side intelligent comments and points of view.
Hi,
I contact you a few weeks ago about the MKE Blog of the Week poll. You won that week (sorry about the slightly delayed results that week, I was moving) and now the site is hosting a semi-finals round with the winners from the past 10 weeks. The voting page and more info are at http://www.mkeonline.com/people/blogcontest.asp. Feel free to e-mail me at webmaster@mkeonline.com if you have any questions. Good luck!
well thought out comments rick...I knew you couldn't be a liberal...you used a clear thought process and some logic...I am a bit short on time right now...but I agree with many of your points...not all, but most.
Well I would like to hear the other side of this before I just believe, on its face, Lindsey Grahams comments. I would agree with one of these. Victimless crimes should not be prosecuted. Prostitution should be done with "monitoring". Something similar to what other "professionals" do for licensing.
I have to agree with ron in this one...I do have some breakdowns in moral fiber...
I want ho's all over the place.
They'll be the new Starbucks!
Post a Comment