So liberal activists want their very own Antonin Scalia on the Supreme Court or more precisely a counterpart to Scalia they believe will be able to articulate a liberal interpretation of the Constitution and offer up the zingers from the bench that has made Scalia a rock-star in conservative legal circles and the conservative movement as a whole.
They want one because according to quite a few people there are no true liberals on the court currently.
"It is a court with no true liberal on it, the most conservative court in 75 years," said Geoffrey Stone, a law professor at the University of Chicago, where Obama once taught constitutional law. "What we call liberals on this court are moderates, of moderate liberals, if you want to get refined about it."
This, of course, is sophistry of the highest order. Stone may not like the current make-up of the court and he is certainly entitled to his position but what becomes much tougher to debate is what more could justices as Ruth Bader Ginsberg or John Paul Stevens do to demonstrate their liberal chops except to be on the liberal side of recent landmark decisions involving property rights, gun rights, free speech and partial birth abortion?
We welcome, though, our liberal friends to pursue their efforts because the reason they have not found their own Scalia is neither by accident nor for a lack of effort by the liberal movement. What this boils down to is the difficulty, no - the near-impossible task of "articulating" to the American public why it is in their best individual and collective interest to have their property taken from them for purposes of private corporate gain and expansion of the municipal tax-base. And try explaining away in the witty Scalia-like prose how partial-birth abortion is anything other than the inhumane procedure it is and how exactly it is that the 2nd amendment (an amendment that resides in a body of amendments that spells out what the citizens CAN do and what the government CANNOT do) prohibits you from owning a handgun. And as a bonus we'll toss-in explaining why it is that multiple-convicted child rapists deserve anymore time here among the living.
The challenge of "articulating" liberal positions with a straight face is one for which waiting for the successful execution, we will not be holding our breath.
So have at it, peeps. Knock yourselves out and get back to us later on how all that is working-out for you.
Story here.
Thursday, July 24, 2008
They're Kidding, Right?
Posted by Dean at 7/24/2008 06:16:00 PM
Labels: 2nd amendment, antonin scalia, Free Speech, John Paul Stevens, liberal ideology, liberals, partial birth abortion, ruth bader ginsburg, U.S. Supreme Court
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
That John Paul Stevens! He's a rock-ribbed conservative and you know it!
Err, just what would a true liberal look like? Lenin?
Post a Comment