Malkin said it, not me. It’s a good phrase. Malkin has more letters of the angry.
Even if the 55 Senators who call themselves Republican were held at gunpoint by Senators Schumer and Clinton and forced to do their bidding, this was no reason to nominate a stealth candidate for the Supreme Court. This was a teaching moment. We as a people who either haven’t been to history and government class for years, or miss out with recent classes, needed the public debate on basic judicial philosophy.
If you ask most anyone, they will tell you in 2000 the Supreme Court gave the election to Bush, but rarely will you find someone who mentions “equal protection clause” in that discussion.
The cost of judicial activism is measured not only in what liberties we may or may not have, but the cost of hesitation in our economy. Why buy something in an area where the State will take it away from you and maybe give you some money back?
Just because something is judicial precedent doesn’t make it closed for discussion. Dred Scott, anyone?
Needn’t we know how this person would apply the Interstate Commerce Clause? The clause that was invoked incorrectly when federal agents were authorized to enter a home of a person growing marijuana for their own consumption? Forget the drug debate for a second: what part of that was interstate or commerce?
John Roberts gave us 44 seconds of sanity (link dead). This country needed the debate this time; not necessarily for the win, but for the opportunity to teach. If the debate was lost, fine, put an unknown in, but at least the message gets out. Unless you’re Ted Haggard, you wouldn’t stop preaching Christ to Christians. We can’t stop teaching American history to Americans.
