Opportunity Indeed, Mr. Sowell
Here at the Asylum, we do not just read blogs. We read the news (yes, even the MSM), and we read the best and the brightest amongst the pundits in America. One of those pundits is the man G. Gordon Liddy calls "the most intelligent man in the world." His name is Thomas Sowell. Thomas Sowell is a brilliant man, and for those that have never read his wisdom, WE highly recommend him.
In today’s Arizona Republic, Mr. Sowell wrote a column on the coming fight over the replacement for Sandra Day O’Connor. Had the Republic’s main site posted this piece on the Internet, we could have simply cut and pasted it, and given credit where it is due. Unfortunately, they opted not to do that, so we had to type this out in it’s entirety. Enjoy reading it.
Opportunity Beckons In Wake Of O’Connor
by Thomas Sowell
My reaction to Justice Sandra Day O’Connor’s retirement was almost as positive as my reaction in 1981 was negative when the Reagan administration announced that they were going to appoint a woman to the Supreme Court.
It wouldn’t matter if all nine justices of the Supreme Court were women, if these were the nine best people available. But to decide in advance that you were going to appoint a woman and then look only among women for a nominee was a dangerous gamble with a court that has become dangerous enough otherwise.
The recent outrageous Supreme Court decision making anyone’s home prey to any politician who wants to confiscate it, using the magic words "public purpose," shows a court full of itself and blind to the havoc it is leaving in it’s wake.
Although Justice O’Connor was one of the four who opposed this latest outrage, over the years she contributed more than her share to the uncertainties and confusions in the law resulting from such nebulous notions as "undue burden" and other "nuanced" policy-making that splits the baby instead of drawing the line.
The political temptation may be great to appoint a Hispanic justice or another woman or some other nominee selected on the basis of group identity rather than individual qualifications. At this crucial juncture in the history of the Supreme Court, that would be needlessly repeating the mistake that brought Sandra Day O’Connor to the high court in the first place.
The political path of least resistance would be to nominate someone who can get confirmed by the Senate without a long political battle that would polarize the country. Another little known "stealth" nominee like David Souter might fit the bill but the track record of Justice Souter’s disgraceful disregard of the Constitution should be enough to warn against going down that road again.
The there are the judicial candidates with a "conservative" label but who lack the toughness and integrity to stand up to all the pressures and temptations to go along with the ideas that will win praise in the media and among the law school elites who favor liberal judicial activism.
Among the "conservatives" who succumbed and "grew" to the Left over time is Justice Anthony Kennedy, once touted by some conservatives as "Bork without a beard" but who turned out to have neither the intellect or the strength of Judge Robert Bork.
Another Anthony Kennedy might fool enough conservatives and appease enough liberals to get confirmed, but our children and our children’s children would end up paying the price in decisions as weak, vacillating—and dangerous—as those which Justice Kennedy has rendered.
President Bush has taken the long view on many issues that he could easily have avoided and saved himself political trouble, including Social Security and drilling for oil in Alaska. So there is hope that he will be prepared to spend some political capital in a tough Senate confirmation fight by nominating someone with both dedication to the Constitution and the strength of character to ignore the pressures and temptations to go along with fashionable "mainstream" judicial activism.
Whether Senate Republicans will have the fortitude and unity to make their majority mean something is another question. The McCain mutiny and sellout against the Republican attempt to stop Senate filibusters by Democrats is a sign that this may be the weak link in any attempt to restore the rule of law in our courts.
Another weak link are those people who think the Senate should not "waste" so much time over judicial nominees, but instead devote its efforts to other things that are considered to be "real" issues of the day.
Recent Supreme Court decisions, of which the one destroying homeowners’ property rights was only the most outrageous, should be enough to make clear that the real issue is preserving the Constitution.
His is, as always, precisely correct. And as our readers can see, we are not the only "nuts" on the Internet that are watching events unfold on the Court; prior events and present events that give us pause. This Court is out of control. It needs to be reined in. The House took steps this past week with HR3058: a bid to nullify the recent Supreme Court ruling allowing state and local governments to take private property for economic development. It passed by a vote of 231-189.
But as Thomas and I, and Mr. Sowell, have pointed out, the weak link is not in the House. It resides in the Senate with a party seemingly afraid of its own shadow. Sure there will be people who disagree with us over Sen. Frist and Company, but where was Frist standing up for Bolton? Where was Frist when the deal was made denouncing the deal? Where is Frist right now on other judicial nominees—qualified nominees—now passed from committee to the floor of the Senate? Where was Frist two years ago when this nominee fiasco started, and he took control of the leadership?
No one wants to answer these questions, but they are relevant. They are relevant in pointing out how weak Frist really is. Better yet, that applies to 99% of the GOP in the Senate. The did not pay attention to how the Democrats commanded strength behind their seemingly-never-ending majority. They do not know how to command respect, and inspire others to do their best, diligently day in and day out. They argue, fuss, and fight, and make little progress for themselves, most often caving into the minority party.
It very much reminds me of a parent pleading with their brat in a store to quit throwing a temper-tantrum over a toy, only later relenting and buy that same brat the same toy they told them that they would not buy. It is as equally destructive to give into a brat as it is to give into the Democrats. The tantrums only get louder, they only get bolder, and in the end, you are giving away the farm just to shut them up.
That cannot happen in this round. This is a winner-take-all war coming up, and if one wants to play, they had better bring their A-Game. If McCain and his mutinous minority march against us again, I would freeze them out of anything and everything they have to attend to in the Senate, save their vote. It is time to send a message to the Democrats. We are not lying down anymore. You are in the minority and are about to find out what that means.
Mr. President, line up your nominees. Let the Democrats filibuster while we burn down their "Rome." If they want to play dirty, then I think it is time for the gloves to come off, and get a little dirty.
The Bunny;)
Here at the Asylum, we do not just read blogs. We read the news (yes, even the MSM), and we read the best and the brightest amongst the pundits in America. One of those pundits is the man G. Gordon Liddy calls "the most intelligent man in the world." His name is Thomas Sowell. Thomas Sowell is a brilliant man, and for those that have never read his wisdom, WE highly recommend him.
In today’s Arizona Republic, Mr. Sowell wrote a column on the coming fight over the replacement for Sandra Day O’Connor. Had the Republic’s main site posted this piece on the Internet, we could have simply cut and pasted it, and given credit where it is due. Unfortunately, they opted not to do that, so we had to type this out in it’s entirety. Enjoy reading it.
Opportunity Beckons In Wake Of O’Connor
by Thomas Sowell
My reaction to Justice Sandra Day O’Connor’s retirement was almost as positive as my reaction in 1981 was negative when the Reagan administration announced that they were going to appoint a woman to the Supreme Court.
It wouldn’t matter if all nine justices of the Supreme Court were women, if these were the nine best people available. But to decide in advance that you were going to appoint a woman and then look only among women for a nominee was a dangerous gamble with a court that has become dangerous enough otherwise.
The recent outrageous Supreme Court decision making anyone’s home prey to any politician who wants to confiscate it, using the magic words "public purpose," shows a court full of itself and blind to the havoc it is leaving in it’s wake.
Although Justice O’Connor was one of the four who opposed this latest outrage, over the years she contributed more than her share to the uncertainties and confusions in the law resulting from such nebulous notions as "undue burden" and other "nuanced" policy-making that splits the baby instead of drawing the line.
The political temptation may be great to appoint a Hispanic justice or another woman or some other nominee selected on the basis of group identity rather than individual qualifications. At this crucial juncture in the history of the Supreme Court, that would be needlessly repeating the mistake that brought Sandra Day O’Connor to the high court in the first place.
The political path of least resistance would be to nominate someone who can get confirmed by the Senate without a long political battle that would polarize the country. Another little known "stealth" nominee like David Souter might fit the bill but the track record of Justice Souter’s disgraceful disregard of the Constitution should be enough to warn against going down that road again.
The there are the judicial candidates with a "conservative" label but who lack the toughness and integrity to stand up to all the pressures and temptations to go along with the ideas that will win praise in the media and among the law school elites who favor liberal judicial activism.
Among the "conservatives" who succumbed and "grew" to the Left over time is Justice Anthony Kennedy, once touted by some conservatives as "Bork without a beard" but who turned out to have neither the intellect or the strength of Judge Robert Bork.
Another Anthony Kennedy might fool enough conservatives and appease enough liberals to get confirmed, but our children and our children’s children would end up paying the price in decisions as weak, vacillating—and dangerous—as those which Justice Kennedy has rendered.
President Bush has taken the long view on many issues that he could easily have avoided and saved himself political trouble, including Social Security and drilling for oil in Alaska. So there is hope that he will be prepared to spend some political capital in a tough Senate confirmation fight by nominating someone with both dedication to the Constitution and the strength of character to ignore the pressures and temptations to go along with fashionable "mainstream" judicial activism.
Whether Senate Republicans will have the fortitude and unity to make their majority mean something is another question. The McCain mutiny and sellout against the Republican attempt to stop Senate filibusters by Democrats is a sign that this may be the weak link in any attempt to restore the rule of law in our courts.
Another weak link are those people who think the Senate should not "waste" so much time over judicial nominees, but instead devote its efforts to other things that are considered to be "real" issues of the day.
Recent Supreme Court decisions, of which the one destroying homeowners’ property rights was only the most outrageous, should be enough to make clear that the real issue is preserving the Constitution.
His is, as always, precisely correct. And as our readers can see, we are not the only "nuts" on the Internet that are watching events unfold on the Court; prior events and present events that give us pause. This Court is out of control. It needs to be reined in. The House took steps this past week with HR3058: a bid to nullify the recent Supreme Court ruling allowing state and local governments to take private property for economic development. It passed by a vote of 231-189.
But as Thomas and I, and Mr. Sowell, have pointed out, the weak link is not in the House. It resides in the Senate with a party seemingly afraid of its own shadow. Sure there will be people who disagree with us over Sen. Frist and Company, but where was Frist standing up for Bolton? Where was Frist when the deal was made denouncing the deal? Where is Frist right now on other judicial nominees—qualified nominees—now passed from committee to the floor of the Senate? Where was Frist two years ago when this nominee fiasco started, and he took control of the leadership?
No one wants to answer these questions, but they are relevant. They are relevant in pointing out how weak Frist really is. Better yet, that applies to 99% of the GOP in the Senate. The did not pay attention to how the Democrats commanded strength behind their seemingly-never-ending majority. They do not know how to command respect, and inspire others to do their best, diligently day in and day out. They argue, fuss, and fight, and make little progress for themselves, most often caving into the minority party.
It very much reminds me of a parent pleading with their brat in a store to quit throwing a temper-tantrum over a toy, only later relenting and buy that same brat the same toy they told them that they would not buy. It is as equally destructive to give into a brat as it is to give into the Democrats. The tantrums only get louder, they only get bolder, and in the end, you are giving away the farm just to shut them up.
That cannot happen in this round. This is a winner-take-all war coming up, and if one wants to play, they had better bring their A-Game. If McCain and his mutinous minority march against us again, I would freeze them out of anything and everything they have to attend to in the Senate, save their vote. It is time to send a message to the Democrats. We are not lying down anymore. You are in the minority and are about to find out what that means.
Mr. President, line up your nominees. Let the Democrats filibuster while we burn down their "Rome." If they want to play dirty, then I think it is time for the gloves to come off, and get a little dirty.
The Bunny;)
posted by Syd And Vaughn | 4:30 PM
2 Comments:
Bunny,
Very good post, and I, like you and Publius enjoy reading Thomas Sowell.
And honestly, I don't think anyone could have done this column more eloquently and to the point the way he did.
Bravo, young lady.
Mistress Pundit
As you know I'm not a fan type person but if I were, Thomas Sowell would rank high on the list. He's very gifted and gets right to the point with clarity. Rawriter
Post a Comment
<< Home