Mark Steyn was filling in for Rush Limbaugh today and he got a very interesting question from a caller, who wondered why the Supreme Court seems to have no trouble legislating law that completely upends thousands of years of cultural norms and flouts the wishes of the people (gay marriage, for example), but freezes up when it is faced with evidentiary situations that may well represent actual crimes under existing law (stealing the presidential election). A fascinating discussion ensued, and if you can catch a recording of the show (this conversation occurred in the first hour) it's well worth listening to.
In a nutshell, and mincing no words, Steyn boiled his conclusions down to (roughly) the following handful:
1) Mass opinions require a mass movement;
2) Judges - even the highest in the land - are as susceptible to threats and intimidation as anyone, and the SCOTUS justices have calculated that there is more to fear from the Left than from the Right (see #1);
3) Judges refusing to do their job, for any reason, are demonstrating cowardice;
4) Any state (which I took to mean not only political sub-units of the U.S., such as Michigan or Pennsylvania, but the nation-state, as well) that cannot ensure a fair election deserves no respect whatsoever.
Steyn's assessment is consistent with an unconfirmed report from Vox Popoli.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately.
Well, Kavanaugh was one of Bush's lackeys and Kavanaugh's wife was Bush's personal secretary.
ReplyDeleteWhen I pointed this out I was invariably shouted down.
We all know Robert's history in SCOTUS and he was a Bush appointment.
Sorry to say, but I reckon the fix was in for the destruction of Western Civilization for a while now.
Have you guys noticed how quiet communist China has been lately?
The problems with voting machines being susceptible to fraud has been known for decades and yet the Republicans did absolutely nothing to address the issues.
Why is that?
We should all pray and get the Last Rights sacraments, imo.
Jeffs: The stance attributed to the Grinning Ferret Roberts would not surprise me at all. But what a foolish position to take (if the reported conversation is true). If the courts decide that victory goes to those most likely to resort to violence, then violence on both sides will escalate.
ReplyDeleteMike: I'm more in favor of making people on the other side start considering the advisability of receiving last rights.
I thought western civilization was collapsing all around me in the 1970s so I joined an ultra conservative religious cult - true! That's where I met my Trinidad born wife who'd spent the 70s working in Germany but decided to migrate to Australia due to threat of nuclear war.
ReplyDeleteAfter the cult I did a uni degree, partly studying the roots of belief. They wanted me to do a PhD but I switched to a Dip Ed and worked in schools for a while, then in aged care, lab work, lately local history archives.