Let the games begin
Well, we now have a Supreme Court nomination, John Roberts of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. For some, on the hysterical left, he is guaranteed to overturn Roe vs. Wade. Others, on the right, are not so sure; in fact, some think we are risking another David Souter, due to the lack of historical judicial record on the issue of abortion and other activist court touchstones.
Michelle Malkin has several excellent posts covering the various views on the right and left:
SCOTUS WATCH: ROBERTS FILE
SCOTUS WATCH: HYPERVENTILATION AND SIGHS OF RELIEF
SCOTUS WATCH: ANN WEIGHS IN.
I find it interesting that Ann Coulter is not enthused with the President's pick due to the experience we had with Justice Souter. I wonder, does her lack of support make it easier for moderates to resist the knee-jerk reactions of Schumer and little Dick Durbin? I would find it quite hilarious, if some years down the road, Roe vs. Wade is overturned, with Justice Roberts in the majority and we find out Karl Rove asked Ann Coulter to come out the way she has. I am willing to bet that someone in the moveon.org crowd has or is about to propose that this is the case. All the more satisfying, for me, is that they are probably foaming at the mouth as they think about it.
So, some of use are not sure how conservative Roberts is or will be. But one thing is guaranteed; the rhetoric against him, will be, in a word, severe. NARAL is already fretting about "reproductive rights" and others about affirmative action, as if these things are actually supported by the Constitution. Focus group tested phrases are being used to paint the candidate as a danger to our hard won freedoms. One has to wonder why such over the top ranting has become normal for one particular side in these matters. Republicans certainly didn't act this way when Ruth Bader Ginsburg was nominated, despite her involvement with the ACLU.
Besides Republicans, in general, not having the guts to fight hard, there is also a change that the other side first noticed with the Robert Bork nomination in 1987. What had changed is that the balance of the court was shifting closer to not legislating from the bench. The other side knows this, and realizes the stakes. If the court really does reject judicial activism, it will not be easily overturned at the next election. When the courts are one's primary means to advance an agenda, it isn't surprising to see such rhetoric. No matter how they spin it, this also shows that they fear Americans working out controversial matters for themselves.
If Roberts really is a strict constructionist, we may very well see the courts actually allowing the American people to decide abortion and other controversies by voting at the state level. Unfortunately, the Democrats, lately screaming about how every vote should count, seem to be against allowing Americans the right to vote on these issues.
It is instructive to see various Democrats mouth their tested words and phrases but then find out who has criticized the Kelo decision and which justices dissented from it. Sadly, for all the Democrats talk of freedom and the rule of law, those terms and phrases never rise above an Orwellian twist of meaning and deception.
Previous post:
"It's good to be the king"
Michelle Malkin has several excellent posts covering the various views on the right and left:
SCOTUS WATCH: ROBERTS FILE
SCOTUS WATCH: HYPERVENTILATION AND SIGHS OF RELIEF
SCOTUS WATCH: ANN WEIGHS IN.
I find it interesting that Ann Coulter is not enthused with the President's pick due to the experience we had with Justice Souter. I wonder, does her lack of support make it easier for moderates to resist the knee-jerk reactions of Schumer and little Dick Durbin? I would find it quite hilarious, if some years down the road, Roe vs. Wade is overturned, with Justice Roberts in the majority and we find out Karl Rove asked Ann Coulter to come out the way she has. I am willing to bet that someone in the moveon.org crowd has or is about to propose that this is the case. All the more satisfying, for me, is that they are probably foaming at the mouth as they think about it.
So, some of use are not sure how conservative Roberts is or will be. But one thing is guaranteed; the rhetoric against him, will be, in a word, severe. NARAL is already fretting about "reproductive rights" and others about affirmative action, as if these things are actually supported by the Constitution. Focus group tested phrases are being used to paint the candidate as a danger to our hard won freedoms. One has to wonder why such over the top ranting has become normal for one particular side in these matters. Republicans certainly didn't act this way when Ruth Bader Ginsburg was nominated, despite her involvement with the ACLU.
Besides Republicans, in general, not having the guts to fight hard, there is also a change that the other side first noticed with the Robert Bork nomination in 1987. What had changed is that the balance of the court was shifting closer to not legislating from the bench. The other side knows this, and realizes the stakes. If the court really does reject judicial activism, it will not be easily overturned at the next election. When the courts are one's primary means to advance an agenda, it isn't surprising to see such rhetoric. No matter how they spin it, this also shows that they fear Americans working out controversial matters for themselves.
If Roberts really is a strict constructionist, we may very well see the courts actually allowing the American people to decide abortion and other controversies by voting at the state level. Unfortunately, the Democrats, lately screaming about how every vote should count, seem to be against allowing Americans the right to vote on these issues.
It is instructive to see various Democrats mouth their tested words and phrases but then find out who has criticized the Kelo decision and which justices dissented from it. Sadly, for all the Democrats talk of freedom and the rule of law, those terms and phrases never rise above an Orwellian twist of meaning and deception.
Previous post:
"It's good to be the king"
Author: Mark K. Sprengel | 9:54:00 PM |
|
| 
Save To ~ Social Bookmarks | My Bookstore |
