Following the failed amendment vote, Sen. Inhofe commented, "Despite the fact that similar legislation had overwhelmingly passed the Senate three times in the past, 47 Democrat Senators changed their position on this issue, bending to pressure from the Obama Administration, setting the stage for military facilities around the United States to temporarily or permanently hold Gitmo detainees. Given the Defense Department’s urgent need for military construction funds, I see no reason to expend these limited funds to construct one or more 'Gitmo Norths'. I am very disheartened and believe this is a cost the American people should not have to bear and a risk this nation cannot accept."

The vote to table Sen. Inhofe's amendment was a partisan vote. Only two Democratic Senators and one Independent voted with Republicans against tabling S. Amdt. 2774. In the future, should any of the funds allocated in H.R. 3082 ever be used to build or modify a facility within the U.S. or its territories for the temporarily or permanently holding of Guantanamo detainees, remember:

Who Voted How on S. Amdt. 2774 -

We've already witnessed a number of controversial Czar appointments, and it appears the president is attempting to infiltrate our courts with far-left liberal activist judges as well. Keep in mind that since some judicial appointments are for life, an extensive vetting process for all nominees should be compulsory. You'd think prior rulings, publications, speeches, and all other pertinent background should be thoroughly examined for any nominee before coming to a Senate confirmation vote. Inadequate vetting as happened with former Green Czar Van Jones is inexcusable at the executive level and should not be repeated, especially for a lifelong court appointment. True, some nominees will skate through the confirmation process despite controversy, as happened with Cass Sunstein, but at least there's a good chance he will go away after 2012. Not so if Hamilton is confirmed.

Back in March, Obama's very first judicial nominee was to appoint anti-Jesus, pro-abortion Judge David Hamilton of Indiana to the United States 7th Circuit Court of Appeals. Indiana Senators Luger (R-IN) and Bayh (D-IN) did recommend the judge, for what may be obvious reasons, but conservative groups immediately took exception to Judge Hamilton as clearly being a far-left extremist, unworthy of a lifetime bench appointment.

There has been no vote by the Senate so far for Hamilton, but Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) intends to change that and has announced plans to call for a cloture vote to cut off further debate putting an end to a filibuster-hold. "We're going to do Judge David Hamilton, 7th Circuit. He's been waiting since April," commented the senator. According to Executive Calendar No. 184 on the lis.gov website, the mandatory quorum required under Rule XXII is ordered to be waived relative to the cloture motion, and the vote will take place sometime on Tuesday, November 17, 2009.

Senator Sessions: Urges No Vote for Judge David Hamilton

While the White House calls Hamilton a moderate judge, Conservatives call him a liberal activist bench legislator. Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL) wrote a letter on Oct. 30th voicing concerns about the Hamilton nomination. The Sessions' letter covers some concerns over Hamilton's past statements and decisions, including:

• Judge Hamilton stated in a 2003 speech that the role of a judge includes writing footnotes to the Constitution. In explaining this statement to Senator Hatch, Judge Hamilton wrote that he believes the Framers intended judges to amend the Constitution through evolving case law.
  
• Judge Hamilton has also written that empathy should factor into the judicial decision making process.
  
• Judge Hamilton prohibited prayers in the Indiana House of Representatives that expressly mentioned Jesus Christ as violative of the Establishment Clause, yet he allowed prayers which mentioned Allah. The Seventh Circuit reversed his ruling.
  
• Judge Hamilton denied a Rabbi's plea to allow a Menorah to be part of the Indianapolis Municipal Building's holiday display. The Seventh Circuit unanimously reversed.
  
• Lawyers in the Almanac of the Federal Judiciary describe Judge Hamilton as one of the most lenient judges in his district in criminal matters.
  
• In United States v. Rinehart, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19498 (S.D. Ind. Feb. 2, 2007), Judge Hamilton used his opinion to request clement for a police officer who pled guilty to two counts of producing child pornography.
  
• In United States v. Woolsey, 535 F.3d 540 (7th Cir. 2008), the Seventh Circuit faulted Judge Hamilton for disregarding an earlier conviction in order to avoid imposing a life sentence on a repeat offender.
  
• … A Woman's Choice v. Newman, 904 F. Supp. 1434 (S.D. Ind. 1995). Through his rulings in this case, Judge Hamilton succeeded in blocking the enforcement of an Indiana informed consent law for 7 years. In reversing, the Seventh Circuit noted that Judge Hamilton had abused his judicial discretion…
  

Judge Hamilton has also served as board member of the Indiana chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and as a fundraiser for ACORN. Also, notice in the above-referenced rulings that on several occasions Hamilton had his hand slapped by the same judicial body for which President Obama intends that he would serve: the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals. Just who will slap his hands now if he gets confirmed to sit on that very bench?