Strengthening Constitutional Self-Government

No Left Turns

Shock-and-Awe Statism

Lots of Republicans are barking up the wrong trees. The truth is that Obama’s foreign policy is as good as a Democrat’s is going to be, and what’s going on the ground seems, for the most part, pretty competent.


The Court appointment just isn’t that important. I’m all for Republicans articulating the basic differences in constitutional interpretation and all that. But social reform, in the president’s view, isn’t going to come from judges overflowing with empathy. When the Court errs on "identity politics," after all, it does so by not declaring unconstitutional excesses originating from the more political parts of government. It, by itself, is not going to be going rogue in that area. And, of course, any Democratic appointee is not going to be about the business of revisiting ROE or going after the initiatives described below.


So all honor to George Will and especially Gov. Mitch Daniels for highlighting the fact that this is an especially unfortunate time for expanding the entitlement mentality. Policies of questionable constitutionality and, more importantly, undeniable stupidity are being adopted quickly and somewhat thoughtlessly. It’s not government’s job, for example, to seduce people into buying cars that are somewhat more fuel efficient but significantly less safe.

Discussions - 8 Comments

On her own, Sotomayor won't make a big difference but once she gets through, it will be onsiderably more difficult to block the next two nominees just like her. These are sorts of moves that will haunt us well beyond Obama's tenure. Maybe the worst, and creepiest, part of the current administration is their tendency to stymie public debate through a kind of hyper-statist, technocratic fiat. The confirmation process is a really good opportunity to shine a bright light on that deeply undemocratic tendency.

social reform, in the president�s view, isn�t going to come from judges overflowing with empathy.

If you believe this, I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.

If I could I would like to begin a dialouge on this issue because I believe that the supreme court pick is the optiomy of party politics infesting the nonartisan judicial branch. Now I like lawles am not necessarily blaming Obama or his pick however, when does it end?!?!

She's probably no worse than any other Dem nominee--but we might affect the next choice if this one fails or nearly fails. And no, she's not much different than Souter. And as you say, the elected branches are already going crazy without her help.

But it is vital in the sense tha Republicans need to stand up to these bad ideas in order to draw a contrast. Otherwise, voters say "Tweedledum, Tweedledee..."

It is also important if the court goes fully liberal with a Pelosi House, Reid Senate and Obama White House. That could mean complete disaster for the country.

I agree that agressive social policy will probably not be coming from the Supreme Court in the near future, but if the balance tips (by say the replacement of a conservative justice with a liberal justice), then the Supreme Court could well be using a veto on conservative policies in ways that we have not even contemplated just yet - in the name of empathy of course. That of course will be a problem if and when conservatives are again in a postion to have their policy preferences implemented by the political branches of the federal government, and that could be a very long while off.

The Obama Administration's proposed CAFE regulations raise the mileage standards for cars from 27.5 mpg to 42 mpg. Thats a 54 % increase in fuel efficiency, which seems to be signficantly greater than "somewhat more fuel efficient." By increasing the CAFE standards, the Administration is helping to create an enormous domestic market for failing American auto companies. Its like the Administration is saying, "OK, domestic auto industry, since you've proven that you cant stay solvent on your own, we've gone ahead and taken care of the demand side of your business. Millions of these new, fuel efficient vehicles will be required by law in the next couple of years. Now, all you have to do is use our money to make them." There's really nothing "seduc[tive]" about this. Its simply the government being forced - again - to take a direct role in operating businesses that can't manage to stay solvent on their own.

Also, "Health and Safety" standards are often chided by conservatives in field of biotechnology because they threaten human dignity by reducing human beings to nothing more than bodies. If this logic is applied to the auto industry, these new more fuel efficient vehicles, which happen to be "significantly less safe" or less concerned with "Health and Safety" standards, actually promise to enhance human dignity, all the while saving you 54 % at the pump. All your metaphysical AND economic needs in one vehicle. I'm seduced!

Ben: you find a truly non partisan person then we can talk about puting one on the court. non partisanship is one of the favorite lies of the false paradigm, everyone has views that influence their thinking. The people saying let it go, you worry me. If she was a white male would you? I don't want someone on the court who's thesis was about citizens not having the right to bear arms. For one thing that means she is not logical because how you can read that otherwise is beyond me. Saying it grants on the military the right to have arms is like having an amendment granting police the right to wear pants. What else would the military do? If she is involved in La Raza, is it a racist institution? Where does it end, when do you stop being afraid of getting the race card played in your face. I think she is qualified enough and makes sense for the democrats and the globalists outside of race, but that means the otherside should argue this.

if the balance tips (by say the replacement of a conservative justice with a liberal justice), then the Supreme Court could well be using a veto on conservative policies in ways that we have not even contemplated just yet

That is the least of our problems. The real damage the court does is not just from its vetoes, but from the laws it passes.

Off the top of my head, here are some laws that I can see being passed by an Obama court. Enactment of gay marriage. Eactment of national health care. Enactment of amnesty for illegal aliens.

Leave a Comment

* denotes a required field
 

No TrackBacks
TrackBack URL: http://nlt.ashbrook.org/movabletype/mt-tb.cgi/13983