Bush Gets “Do Over” on Supreme Court

After proving that she probably would be a justice like Sandra Day O’Connor, Harriett Miers has thrown in the towel. While we held out hope that she would be a justice like Thomas or Scalia, it became less likely as the hearings were drawing near that this was the case. The more we learned about Miers, the murkier her core values became. She appears to be just another antinomian evangelical merrily going through life.

Miers gave us a break by stopping this train wreck before it went off the bridge. The real question is will President Bush give his supporters a real constitutional conservative that they can rally around or will he give us another pick like his father did? It has been truly amazing how timid that President Bush has been on domestic issues.

Perhaps the President will realize that the Democrats don’t want peaceful coexistence but to eradicate all conservative Republicans starting with him. Bush needs to get a spine and lead by example, not capitulate to his enemies. They want his head on the impeachment spear before the next election.

How this man can so compartmentalize his mind that the Global War on Terror is just but domestic enemies are to be appeased and not defeated is truly a marvel. He took an oath to defend us from all enemies foreign and domestic. If he would secure the borders, appoint the judges that he promised and reign in the spending of Congress he could elevate himself as one of the best Presidents in our history. I hope that the President will step-up and take advantage of this opportunity.

In the movie City Slickers, Billie Crystal’s line was Life is a do over; for President Bush, so is this chapter in his administration.

Thoughts on Hariet Miers

There has always been a coalition that makes-up the Conservatives within the Republican Party. On one end are the religious Conservatives whose primary interest is to reign-in the assault on traditional faith and morality and on the other end are those whose primary concerns are fiscal Conservatism. These folks have advocated less government and lower taxes.

Since Ronald Reagan was president, both of these groups and those who cling to one degree or another to both viewpoints have been moving in the same direction. However, this single nomination by President Bush has broken these groups into their component pieces. Frankly, this is a fascinating to watch.

The Democrats have dutifully circled the wagons and braced for major combat but they can’t decide what their target should be. They are furiously spinning in circles waiting for orders from their special interest groups. The Democrats are willing to fight any nominee because their side needs the fundraising opportunity that a Supreme Court vacancy can generate.

Both sides want a knockdown, drag-out fight to vanquish their enemies in the public arena. This fight would be the political spectacle of the 21st Century. The stakes are for the heart and soul of the Republic. The outcome would be the fourth Constitutional period of our country. (1789 to Civil War; then Civil War to New Deal, then New Deal to Bush Court.)

Instead, President Bush has taken a page from Bill Clinton and triangulated a third option. Not since Solomon decreed that each mother should get half of the baby has something so out of the box of conventional wisdom been tried. Look at the early results. We know from the public record that Harriet Miers is a church going lawyer that has a unique skill set to offer to the position. She teaches Sunday school at a conservative church where she has attended since becoming a born again Christian about 25 years ago. She has managed a law firm of 400 partners—getting that many lawyers to agree is a really big deal. She also has had her turn in trail settings. Plus she has been with George Bush for many years.

Don’t you wonder why the Religious Right is giving each other high fives for this nomination? There is a private record that will never see the light of day but some on the Christian Right have dropped enough hints to read between the lines. There are code words from these pundits that hint at why they are really upbeat. My conclusion after hearing several of the folks in this camp interviewed is that Harriet Miers will be very pro-life, supportive of traditional marriage, and a solid conservative. She may end-up as one of the most conservative jurists on the Court.

The fiscally Conservative folks in the Republican ranks are clueless about these hints that have been offered for our comfort. Since the whole Christian thing is not as important to them, they miss the subtlety of this pick. They want raw meat in the public square and not Bush’s political triangulation. They are not happy. A polite “trust me” from the President is of little comfort to them.

Since almost anything would be an upgrade from the disappointing legacy of Sandra Day O’Connor, they might not opposed Miers but there is no enthusiasm for this pick.

The Democrats are just beginning to realize that Bush skunked them really good with this pick. Again they have no paper trail to use against the nominee. No paper trail means that it will be difficult to mount a unified opposition and there is nothing for their interest groups to use for fundraising except that she is a Christian. Bashing Miers on that score will cause the Democrats to risk dividing their own people. They will lose many—especially the racial minorities —if they push religion too hard. Plus they risk confronting the Constitutional prohibition on test oaths. Not that they care much for the Constitution but this is new ground to desecrate even for them. They still have an institutional memory of JFK and the Catholic issue. They can’t afford to loose the gray-haired New Deal Democrats in the rest homes.

Worse news for the Democrats will be that both of these confirmations (Roberts & Miers) will force them to concede that they are in the minority for the foreseeable future. All they had left was the threat of the filibuster and Bush has found a strategy to take that from them. He turned their tactic for getting Clinton’s judges back on them; “I sorry but that case might come before the Court so I can’t answer that question.”

The next vacancy will occur after the 2006 elections if the nine in black robes (weren’t they the bad guys in Lord of the Rings-fallen greedy kings of men) remain in good health. Why because the Republicans will pickup two or three seats in the Senate and the liberal Northeastern Republicans will cease to be the power brokers (spoilers) in the Senate. At that point it will be game over for the Democrats and then a justice or two will throw in the towel and retire. Bush could
end-up with four picks before the end of his second term.

Yeah, I want “red meat” in the public square too but this might be a far sighted gamble with a better payoff at the end.

They say the Lord works in mysterious ways, well folks this is one of those instances

Newdow is Back

Michael Newdow is back! After failing to get the Pledge of Allegiance banned from Elk Grove’s public schools last year because he lacked standing in the courts, he has brought a new suit on behalf of others.

U.S. District Judge Lawrence Karlton ruled today that the Pledge is unconstitutional because it contains the phrased “one nation under God.”

The judge cited the infamous 9th Circuit Court in San Francisco as precedent.

This should clear the way for John Roberts to be appointed Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court. This act of judicial activism illustrates why we need conservatives on the Court.

Thoughts on Chief Justice John Roberts

It is a strange confluence of events that has lead to John Roberts being elevated from a nominee to Associate Justice to Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.

Think about it. At least four separate events have all occurred to elevate this situation to the critic mass necessary to put Roberts in this situation. First was the announced retirement of Sandra Day O’Connor. Second was the selection of John Roberts to fill this vacancy. Third was the devastation of Hurricane Katrina. And fourth was the death of Chief Justice William Rehnquist.

This has resulted in Roberts getting the nod for the Chief spot to insure continuity of leadership such as it is in the Court. I suspect that he will leave most on the existing staff in tact for him first term on the high court.

I am curious why Rehnquist chose to hold on to his spot until the very end. Did he have no other reason keep going other than his work? Was he a good soldier and trying to make it easier for President Bush to fill the existing vacancy? Did he have any issues or concerns about Roberts (who was one of his former clerks)?

Anyway, the whole situation is a good example of how Calvinists view the governance of Christ. God is in control and brings his will to pass in time and space; here not just in the hereafter. Yes, this would mean that Roberts would be Gods choice—if in fact he is confirmed.

In fact all government leaders are in office at the pleasure of the Almighty. Some we view as good and are thankful for their time in office but I don’t understand why God allows Nero or Napoleon or Hitler or Stalin. Others seem somewhere in between.

I have faith that Roberts is one of the good guys and will help turn our country towards laws and values that honor God. The Court has long been the institution most responsible for pouring-out Gods wrath and judgment on our nation. Perhaps when the Court is reconstituted it can be a vessel for healing our nation.

Roberts Opposition Begins Attacks

Ann Coulter is outstanding in her field. Well yeah; but this time she’s all alone screaming her lungs out. Noooooooo!!

Meanwhile, Hugh Hewitt is strutting around like the rooster in the barnyard. He has always advocated John Roberts as one of the top three choices for the Court.

Granted, there is not that much of a paper trail at the Appellate level, but Roberts has an extensive record as an attorney and advocate for causes that Conservatives support.

I trust Hewitt. He has demonstrated good judgment on many issues and Roberts is his friend.

While it is true that only God truly knows a mans heart; on the outside, Roberts seems to be a good choice. I am amazed that the usual suspects on the Left are already resorting to digging dirt on his wife. They are upset that he is married to a woman that is Catholic and Pro-life. The Left is angry that Roberts might be a rarity in politics, a Catholic that believes in the teachings of the church. This is quite a contrast the lapsed Catholics that dare sit in judgment of him such as DUI Kennedy.

Roberts family should be off limits to this confirmation process. The fact that the Left has to resort to such tactics is an indication that they lack a hook for their fundraising letters.

I think this process will have some delays but Roberts will ultimately be confirmed. Replacing the Chief Justice will be a cakewalk when that time comes but if there is a third opening in the court during the second Bush term, it will be all-out war because this will be the vote that will permanently move the Court to the Right and Liberals will have lost all three branches at this point.

Oh, look for the Chief Justice to retire shortly after Roberts has been confirmed.

Supremes: Men Don’t Need God’s Law

There is a right way, a wrong way and the weasel way. This is the view of corporate America as described by Dilbert writer Scott Adams. Today is proof that it applies to judicial decisions.

The split decision handed down today is worse than a draw. It is open season and full employment for all constitutional law attorneys. There is no unifying principle that can explain both decisions.

These cases plus the case last week about private property prove that there are no limits on judicial tyranny. Our law has become completely unmoored from the Constitution.

Like Christianity in Liberal churches, the historic meaning of the words and ideas that originated the Constitution has been discarded as limiting and out of fashion. The context in which the document was written has no relevance to modern jurisprudence.

Liberals have substituted an “enlightened” view that you can redefine the words and ideas to mean whatever you wish them to say. If that doesn’t work you can ignore them or substitute your own. This is the essence of a “living document.”

Courting Next Justice

There is talk that the first vacancy in the Supreme Court will be Sandra Day O’Connor. This was reported by William Kristol and carried on Hugh Hewitt yesterday. This would be President Bush’s first opportunity to appoint anyone to the Court. Kristol also reports that Attorney General Roberto Gonzales will replace Justice O’Conner.

With all due respect to President Bush and his supporters such as the California High School Conservative, selecting Gonzales would be the worst move that Bush can make. Gonzales lacks the values that we need on the Court, especially in light of the ruling today on private property rights.

Gonzales is reportedly “moderate”. We don’t need more squishy pro-abortion judges on the Court. If he is not a principled, strict constructionist then we don’t need him. Cloning David Sutter is wasting an appointment.

If Bush appoints Gonzales as his first justice, then his next one will be further to the Left or he won’t get through the Senate. If Gonzales is nominated to replace Stevens, I might consider that an upgrade, but O’Conner and Kennedy have alternated being the swing votes on almost every decision of the Court.

Getting someone more Conservative than O’Conner is critical.

I am not saying that the President should nominate Gonzales. That is his choice.

What I am saying is that should he nominate Gonzales I would support him 100%. O’Connor has been wobbly; I think that Gonzales would be fairly conservative compared to her.

Sure, we can disagree with him on a few social issues. However, I do not think that the President will nominate someone who he thinks will shred the Judeo-Christian legacy of this country. I trust the president in that regard.

The biggest issue right now in the world is The War on Terror. Gonzales has shown consistency in that area in letting the US Government do what it needs to get the job done.

Court Abolishes Private Property

The Supreme Court ruling handed down today in Kelo v New London declares what we have known all along. All land—publicly and privately owned—is the king’s land and we use it only at his pleasure. Now every petty local official and robber baron has the right to anything that you own.

The myth of private property has been a cherished idea for many years. But the fact is that the government has laid claim to all the land for decades. The test of this is very simply. If your house and land are fully paid, the government can still legally take it away from you. If you fail to pay property tax the government can take it away from you. The fact that you can loose it means it never really belonged to you.

The decision today just expands the ease with which the government can separate you from you land. Wealth redistribution has expanded from tax revenue to assets. Now we can rob land from the middle and lower classes and give to the rich with the same ease that the New Deal has robbed money from the rich and given to the middle and lower classes.

Posting the Ten Commandments and Leftist Frenzy

Any day now the US Supreme Court will rule on a case that involves posting the Ten Commandments. Many are waiting nervously for the outcome. Will the Commandments be allowed publicly? If yes, the case will stand. If the Commandments are banned, this will heighten interest in the case being revisited after President Bush makes appointments to the Court.

Besides the usual suspects arguing for the myth of separation of church and state, a new group on the Left has emerged with a new argument. Their argument is based on the fear of Dominionists within the “Christian Right.”

If the Supreme Court allows the Ten Commandments to be posted publicly in government facilities, many extremists will view this as a major step to accomplishing the first point of Bruce Prescott’s six point outline on how Dominionists (also called Reconstructionists) plan to take over the United States.

Stripped to its barest essentials, here is their blueprint for America. Their ultimate goal is to make the U.S. Constitution conform to a strict, literal interpretation of Biblical law. To do that involves a series of legal and social reforms that will move society toward their goal. 1) Make the ten commandments the law of the land . . .

—Dr. Bruce Prescott

There are a myriad of conspiracy theories circulating in the Left that have no basis in reality. Instead of checking their facts, they use each other as sources for what the other guys are doing. From these distortions, the Left claims that the Right is secretly working to impose a new order that will result in a Theocracy . For the Left to equate posting the Ten Commandments with abolishing democracy and setting-up a theocracy is just crazy. We will see if Howard Dean & company make the claim anyway.

The assertion—that the Right wants to establish a theocracy as part of some grand conspiracy that makes the X-Files look tame in comparison—is a conclusion that illustrates that Left makes the same error in religion that they do in Law; they fail to go to the source documents to find original intent. They cannot comprehend the outline of the subject let alone understand the subtleties of the subject matter. The denial of Truth and absolutes of Good and Evil blind them to the point of view of their opponents. Their defective reasoning results in intellectually lazy leftists that are able to equate such things as the “Christian Right” with the Taliban.

The fact that the Ten Commandments were allowed to be posted in any government building for the first 150 years of this nation’s history and are written above the heads of the judges who will sit in judgment of God’s Law, is a historical fact that the Left chooses to ignore because it doesn’t fit their construct. They ignore the fact that the Constitution recognizes that we have freedom of religion, not freedom from religion.

The reaction to the Court ruling will be most instructive. Let’s see if I am correct in my assertions.