Dear Editor, 

In its August 7 editorial, the News Press chose to characterize a letter to Senator
Bond from the Buchanan County Republican Central Committee as “scathing”,
and then chose a few select phrases, out of context, to characterize not only that
letter but Senator Bond’s statements regarding his vote. The editorial makes
reference to the Senator’s long history as a Republican, which we also
acknowledged and praised in our letter, as well as our long-time support for
Senator Bond.

As a response and a display of fairness, I now present some of Senator Bond’s
own statements as presented on the Senate floor, and would ask that the editors
also print our complete letter based on those statements. I do not believe any
omissions in the following quotes change the character of his speech, although
comments and the Senator’s conclusions may be inserted for context. Overall
these statements are arranged as they were presented:

BOND: Few duties carry more …responsibility, than giving advice and consent on who should become a Justice on the highest court…

/snip\

BOND: …I support, a judge that calls balls and strikes like an umpire, not letting their own personal views bias the outcome of the trial. (Sotomayor: “I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences …”)

BOND: The statue of justice is blindfolded for a reason, so that she cannot tip the scales of justice with the prejudice of bias or belief. (Sotomayor: “…would more often than not reach a better conclusion…”)

/snip\

BOND: I disagree that the civil rights of a firefighter mean so little that they do not deserve even a full opinion before an appeals court. (Sotomayor dismissed discrimination case; Bond’s conclusion: I will support her.)
BOND: I disagree that…wisdom has anything to do with the sex of a person or the color of their skin. (Sotomayor: “a wise Latina woman…would…reach a better conclusion”; Bond’s conclusion: I will support her.)
BOND: I disagree that judges should ever consider foreign law when looking for meaning in U.S. statutes or the U.S. Constitution. (Sotomayor: “…learn from foreign law and the international community when interpreting our Constitution…” Bond’s conclusion: I will support her.)

/snip\

BOND: I do agree that she has proven herself…talented and accomplished…

/snip\

BOND: I do agree that Judge Sotomayor has proven herself as a leader of her community, who inspires the pride and hopes…(Bond’s conclusion: I will be proud for her, the community she represents)
I do agree that Judge Sotomayor has proven herself as a symbol… (Bond’s conclusion: I will be proud for her, the community she represents)

BOND: … my choice for President did not win the last election, and…our people’s democracy have spoken for the change and they are getting it. Elections do have consequences. (Bond’s conclusion: I will work…to ensure that the next Presidential election has consequences in the opposite direction.)

/snip\

BOND: But I do agree that the country is tired of partisanship…

/snip\

BOND: I respect and agree with the legal reasoning of my colleagues who will vote no,

but I will…hope for the future, with less polarization, less confrontation, less partisanship.

/snip\

BOND: For my conservative friends, the best way to ensure that we have conservative judges on the bench, is to work to see that we elect Presidents who will nominate them.

/snip\

BOND: For my liberal friends I hope they remember this day when another qualified nominee is before the Senate who is conservative.

/snip\

BOND: I will support her.  I will be proud for her, the community she represents and the American dream she shows possible.

A reader might infer from these statements that the Senator’s own conclusion
contradicts “the legal reasoning of (his) colleagues”, as well as his own. And his
vote is only in the interest of not appearing partisan, letting any President have
what he wants without dissent -- in the “hope they remember this day” that he
gave in, and being on the winning side of an historic nomination.
 

It was in the context of these statements by the Senator, and Justice Sotomayor,
that the Committee issued its letter.

Sincerely,

Following is the letter the Buchanan County Republican Central Committee submitted to the office of Senator Kit Bond.

The Honorable Christopher “Kit” Bond
US Senator – Missouri 

It is with great disappointment that the Buchanan County Republican Central
Committee finds the need to submit this letter expressing our discontent with
Senator Kit Bond's decision to vote in favor of the appointment of Justice
Sonia Sotomayor to the United States Supreme Court.  

The committee fully recognizes and appreciates Justice Sotomayor's
background and service, but feels her past rulings and public comments are
in conflict with the appropriate role of a justice on the highest court in the land.
We are saddened that a fellow Republican entrusted with the responsibility to
vote on her qualifications and temperament believes otherwise.

The Buchanan County Republican Central Committee has a long history of
support for Senator Bond.  Many of our members have volunteered tirelessly
on his campaigns -- many since his days as Governor of this great state.  It is
with regret that we must condemn his announced yes vote on the confirmation
of Justice Sotomayor.

In his statement to the press, Senator Bond noted that "elections have
consequences". By ascribing an affirmative vote on her confirmation as the
result of "elections have consequences", Senator Bond diminishes the balance
of power constitutionally provided through the Senate confirmation process.
His actions deny us, the voters who elected him, those same, resulting "elections
have consequences" benefits since he is abdicating the senatorial powers he
earned when we elected him. 

While fully aware that Republicans lost the Presidential race in 2008, as a
committee we understand that the loss does not mean we must abandon our
principles as a political party by giving a free pass to those who would tear
down the foundations of our great nation. Nominee Sotomayor's past
statements and actions do not reflect the fair-minded values of the US
Constitution, Missourians, or the Republican Party.  

We respectfully request that Senator Bond reconsider his position on this vote
and cast a NO vote for the confirmation of Justice Sotomayor. 

If his yes vote is an attempt to leave public service with a legacy of bipartisanship
at the expense of conceding his principles, we would remind him of what an
empty legacy that would be.  We hope that he will finish his long tenure as a
public servant by clinging to the foundations that have returned him to office for
so many years.

 Respectfully,