[fereupfer]

September 07, 2005 The Actual Extremists The Democrats' orgy over retiring Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor is simply one deceptive element of their great con game in planning for war over her successor. Oh, certain, they approve of O'Connor's working safety of-the Court's pro-abortion precedent. And they enjoy different jobs she took in furtherance of the policy goal, but she's rarely their perfect jurist. In the end, she sided with most in "selecting" George W. Bush president. Their current, single party of O'Connor is a part of their negative computation to put themselves as conventional and Republicans as extremists. They see this being an important basis within their mission to garner the prerequisite public service to excuse their impending filibuster of-the individual President Bush nominates to restore O'Connor. This is among the several factors we are able to ignore as disingenuous their denials that public opinion and public interest groups may matter in this method. But don't discount the degree of the fraud they're orchestrating here. They're wanting to persuade the people that any nominee who's reputed to be an originalist is definitely an extremist -- "outside the wide mainstream." They're managing the verification process as still another national election, since they see the Court like a co-equal policy-making department of government. Their phony compliment for O'Connor is merely the initial step within their trick. By lauding her like a "mainstream conservative," they lay the foundation for marking anybody less activist than her an extremist. But obviously we know they'll vilify and pillory with ferocious strength any nominee who opposes legislating from the table, or includes a reputation, particularly on abortion and other social problems. The frustrating thing about any of it is the fact that these liberals would be the people therefore away from political mainstream. Their philosophy continues to be soundly rejected in subsequent national elections. Leader Bush campaigned on the demonstrably articulated promise to employ judges in-the form of justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas, and it's fair to infer the general public, in re-electing him, had no important questions to his promise. Ergo, any nomination he makes in satisfaction of it, by definition shouldn't be seen as away from conventional. Beyond that, have you ever considered the fundamental material of the jobs liberals want to go off as conventional? In their mind, any nominee who will probably stick to the part the Framers created for appellate judges is just a right-wing extremist. Any judge who promises to read the Constitution based on its basic meaning and the Framers' unique intention is likely to be considered an extremist. Any nominee who might just be have the freedom and audacity -- a characteristic they pretend to appreciate -- to refuse the Roe v. Wade abortion precedent, is likely to be placed an extremist. Just those particular to senselessly follow the abominable, unconstitutional range of cases Roe brought in will be praised as a "consensus building" conventional, centrist judge "who will carry people together" -- as though that's the event of a Supreme Court justice. Would you suppose it's ever happened to these folks that abortion wasn't quite as divisive a problem when its legitimacy was based on the bodies politic of the a few states -- a cabal liberals just cannot afford to trust with policy choices? The dirty little secret is the fact that the liberals would be the extremists in this entire procedure. They're the people who refuse popular sovereignty by utilizing the courts to thwart the will of the folks. They refuse to allow state legislatures when it's perhaps not in line with their remarkable enlightened eyesight to create policy and they refuse to allow the Senate majority to do its advice and consent function by their unprecedented partisan filibustering of judicial nominees. They'll not acknowledge their liberalism, that is very interested if they really feel their ideas are mainstream. They're reluctant to keep the struggles of the Culture War to become fought at the degree of the tradition and by the duly elected political divisions. They insist on utilizing the courts to put cultural change down the people's throats -- because they understand what is better for them. They're those who would like the Court -- with no constitutional power -- to foist regulations and customs of foreign nations onto our jurisprudence. Therefore the next time these lockstep liberals reveal they're in the mainstream, keep in mind that they not only aren't mainstream, they've contempt for those who are and for the expressed will of the folks. And, they'll use any means essential -- including propaganda -- to subvert the will of the folks they pretend to respect. Published by David Limbaugh at July 7, 2005 08:34 PM