I thought Connecticut was one of those places that had gotten beyond crap like this:
It appears that Republicans in Connecticut are moving back to pounding on the social issues drum, after having soft-pedaled those issues in recent years, which has, at least in part, enabled them to gain seats in the legislature. But it looks like that may be changing:
Whether or not it's sexual orientation, it's certainly political; it doesn't appear that the Republicans have made their case against McDonald, although, from the article, they dug up every bit of dirt they could, and embellished it where necessary.
OK, so it's not about sexual orientation. It doesn't seem to be about anything else, though.
Via Joe.My.God.
Senate Republicans voted as a bloc Tuesday to deny Andrew J. McDonald confirmation as chief justice of the Connecticut Supreme Court, stopping the ascent of a political and legal trailblazer for the gay community, a factor that opponents insisted was irrelevant and supporters said could not be ignored.
It appears that Republicans in Connecticut are moving back to pounding on the social issues drum, after having soft-pedaled those issues in recent years, which has, at least in part, enabled them to gain seats in the legislature. But it looks like that may be changing:
[Sen. Len] Fasano, who left his office Friday with binders containing copies of McDonald’s cases, reviewed three in fine detail. He questioned whether McDonald had reached beyond the record to render decisions. The level of detail in Fasano’s critique drew an unusual rebuke from the governor while the debate still was under way.
“Senator Fasano’s performance today should send a chill up the spine of every sitting judge in Connecticut,” Malloy said. “His antics run afoul of the tradition and decorum our General Assembly has followed since 1636. During that long history, no legislative leader, let alone a member of the Connecticut bar, has nitpicked, parsed, and deconstructed the decisions of a sitting judge more than Senator Fasano did today.”
“It is now an undeniable fact that Andrew McDonald has been treated differently than others who came before him,” Malloy said. “It begs the question: What is different about Justice McDonald that so concerns Connecticut Republicans?”
Republicans said it was not sexual orientation.
Whether or not it's sexual orientation, it's certainly political; it doesn't appear that the Republicans have made their case against McDonald, although, from the article, they dug up every bit of dirt they could, and embellished it where necessary.
OK, so it's not about sexual orientation. It doesn't seem to be about anything else, though.
Via Joe.My.God.
No comments:
Post a Comment