Well, the President has abandoned his latest nominee for the Supreme Court to her fate. Funny, why aren't we surprised? John Kerry went back for his crewman in the river in 'Nam, but when Bush's "buddy" gets in trouble, our President cuts and runs.
Oh, but at least the CIC is standing fast and tall in Iraq. Let us honor the sacrifice of our dead soldiers by giving them more of their freinds in Heaven.
So who is Bushee Boy going to nominate for the Court now? Well, this might seem a little crazy (not as crazy as the last nomination), but how about this: Anita Hill.
Why Anita Hill? I can tell you why in two words - Clarence Thomas.
For those of you who don't remember, Anita Hill is that piece of sucullant black poonage that ol' Clarance was dying to tap while he was blowing dope in the 70's. Anita was almost the Monica Lewinsky of the Thomas nomination - except for a few differences: 1) Anita didn't do anything, and 2) despite the best efforts of the future Supreme Court Justice, neither did Thomas. Oh and she was quite smart, so that's another difference I guess.
Well, it's time to toss ol 'Clar a bone. Since he can't be Chief Justice, a fact I bitterly rue, how about giving him a little action? Anita can't say no forever.
Or can she?....
Anita Hill and Harriet Miers names have already been tossed into the memory hole. So, as amusing as seeing either nominee's performance in the hearings before the obligatory "up or down vote" we just have to get over our dissapointment and get used to the sound of "Justice Scalito".
ReplyDeleteNYT is painting him as a really nice, genuine, humble, intellectually gifted legal thinker, so much so as to make us forget all about those court cases we heard so much about right after the nomination was announced (for instance, his legal opinion that governments have no business regulating machine guns; wives having to get husbands' permission to have abortions after they turn 18 and are relived of their obligation to tell their mommies and dadies...ETC!)
So Roe V Wade is about to become unsettled law. Unsettled, with extreme prejudice. And high time, too, Pope Ratzinger and lots of others might add. (You as well, I think.) But after the issue is bounced back to the States and the Christian PACs to deal with, does anyone think we are about to start talking about other moral issues that liberal (sic.) Christians used to think were important?
Hell no. Gay marriage is next on the agenda. The book of Leviticus is full of items that must be dealt with before we can even talk about globalization and outsourcing, not to mention the war and the Gulag Americana. In Hoc Signo Vinces!