Tuesday, September 06, 2005

How Will the Left Oppose the Roberts Nomination as Chief Justice?

Ralph Kostant writes in with these thoughts about the Roberts nomination:

Even while his Administration is under siege from the Main Stream Media and the Democrats over the Hurricane Katrina relief effort and the war in Iraq, George W. Bush shows that strain and stress have not dulled his political instincts. Besides being an excellent nomination on the merits, naming Judge John Roberts to replace the late William Rehnquist as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court virtually disarms the enemy before the confirmation battle has begun.

In the weeks since the initial nomination of Judge Roberts to the Supreme Court, the most cogent argument (and I am applying a very liberal and tolerant standard of cogency here) against his confirmation has been that President Bush should have named a “moderate” (meaning a liberal) jurist to replace the supposedly moderate Justice Sandra Day O’Connor. For example, in an August 31, 2005 opinion piece in the Los Angeles Times, Duke Law School Professor of Law Professor Erwin Chemerinsky warned that Judge Roberts would replace Justice O’Connor’s swing vote on the Left’s Holy Trinity of abortion, affirmative action and separation of church and state. One suspects, however, that Professor Chemerinsky would find anyone to the right of Lawrence Tribe to be unduly conservative.

[Of course, it is an indicator of how the nation’s politics have shifted to the right since 1964 (which I would mark as the high tide of liberalism in America) that Justice O’Connor would be considered by both the Left and the Christian Right to be a moderate. Never mind that Sandra Day O’Connor was an Arizona Republican and the natural-born political scion of Barry Goldwater. Even Senator Goldwater would be considered a moderate in the current political atmosphere. What typifies Goldwater conservatism, and now brands both him and Justice O’Connor as “moderates”, is their almost libertarian conviction that government interference in our private personal lives is as abhorrent as its interference in our businesses and with our property rights. However, I digress--that is a topic for another discussion.]

The argument that Judge Roberts was too conservative a replacement for Justice O’Connor is now moot. Judge Roberts will not replace the “moderate” Justice O’Connor, but rather her Stanford Law School classmate and former comrade-at-arms in Arizona politics, Chief Justice William Rehnquist. The Left has never tried to portray Justice Rehnquist as a moderate (although they prefer him to the twin Princes of Darkness, Justices Scalia and Thomas). While always acting with prudent regard for stare decisus (the principle that the Supreme Court should try to preserve stability and predictability in our system of law, by respecting its prior decisions), CJ Rehnquist regularly parted company with Justice O’Connor in cases involving abortion rights, affirmative action and establishment clause issues. President Bush is replacing a conservative Chief Justice with the very person that CJ Rehnquist considered to be his judicial disciple, in politics, style and judicial philosophy. To have chosen a “moderate” to replace CJ Rehnquist would have been to disturb the very status quo that the liberals have been arguing must be preserved.

Not that the Left will stop arguing that Judge Roberts is too conservative, but the shamelessness of the argument will be more fully displayed. The Left is really arguing against the result of the 2004 elections.

I fully expect the battle lines now to be drawn over the even more fallacious issue of Judge Robert’s supposed lack of judicial experience. Even setting aside the facts that he has now sat for two years on the Federal appellate bench, and that he may well have more experience as an advocate before the Supreme Court than any prior nominee in the nation’s history, one may easily hoist Lefties on their own petards, if they assert the lack-of-experience issue. The patron saint of Chief Justices, for the Liberal Left, is Earl Warren. At the time of his nomination as Chief Justice by President Eisenhower, he was the sitting Governor of California, and had utterly no judicial experience.

Ralph B. Kostant


Anonymous Anonymous said...

Program on the emergence of civilization.

"14 species of large animals capable of domesitcation in the history of mankind.
13 from Europe, Asia and northern Africa.
None from the sub-Saharan African continent. "
And disfavor.

They point out Africans’ failed attempts to domesticate the elephant and zebra, the latter being an animal they illustrate that had utmost importance for it's applicability in transformation from a hunting/gathering to agrarian-based civilization.

The roots of racism are not of this earth.

Austrailia, aboriginals:::No domesticable animals.

The North American continent had none. Now 99% of that population is gone.

AIDS in Africa.

Organizational Heirarchy/Levels of positioning.
Heirarchical order, from top to bottom:

1. MUCK - perhaps have experienced multiple universal contractions (have seen multiple big bangs), creator of the artificial intelligence humans ignorantly refer to as "god"
2. Perhaps some mid-level alien management
3. Evil/disfavored aliens - runs day-to-day operations here and perhaps elsewhere

Terrestrial management/positioning:

4. Chinese/egyptians - this may be separated into the eastern and western worlds
5. Romans - The seamless transition between Cleopatra and Julius Ceasar may be a clue alluding to a partnership.
6. Mafia - the real-world 20th century interface that constantly turns over generationally so as to reinforce the widely-held notion of mortality
7. Jews, corporation, women, politician - Evidence exisits to suggest mafia management over all these groups.

Movies foreshadowing catastrophy
1985 James Bond View to a Kill 1989 San Francisco Loma Prieta earthquake.

Our society gives clues to the system in place. We all have heard the saying "He has more money than god." There is also an episode of the Simpsons where god meets Homer and says "I'm too old and rich for this."

This is the system on earth because this is the system everywhere.

20 cent/hour Chinese labor, 50 cents for material.
An $80 sweater costs less than a dollar; homage, tribute kicked upstairs vindicates the creative accounting.

I don't want to suggest the upper eschelons are evil and good is the fringe. But these individuals become wealthy exploiting those they hurt.

They have made it abundantly clear that doing business with evil (disfavored) won't help people. They say only good would have the ear, since evil is struggling for survival, and therefore only the favored could help.

The clues are there which companies are favored and which are disfavored, but they conceal it very hard because it is so crucial.

I offer an example of historical proportions:::

People point to Walmart and cry "anti-union".
Unions enable disfavored people to live satisfactorly without addressing their disfavor. This way their family's problems are never resolved. Without the union they would have to accept the heirarchy, their own inferiority.
Unions serve to empower.
Walmart is anti-union because they are good. They try to help people address and resolve their problems by creating an enviornment where there are fewer hurdles.

Media ridicule and lawsuits are creations to reinforce people's belief that Walmart is evil in a subsegment of the indistry dominated by the middle and lower classes.
Low-cost disfavored Chinese labor is utilized by corporate america to maximize margins. They all do it. Only WalMart gets fingered because they are the ones who help, and those who seek to create confusion in the marketplace want to eliminate the vast middle class who have a real chance and instead stick with lower classes who may not work otherwise. So they dirty him up while allowing the others to appear clean.

The middle class is being deceived. They are being misled into the unfavored, and subsequently will have no assistance from their purchases with corporate america.

The coining of the term "Uncle Sam" was a clue alluding to just this::Sam Walton and WalMart is one of few saviors of the peasant class.

Amercia is a country of castoffs, rejects. Italy sent its criminals, malcontents.
Between the thrones, the klans and kindred, they "decided" who they didn't want and acted, creating discontent and/or starvation.
The u.s. is full of disfavored rejects. It is the reason for the myriad of problems not found in European countries. As far as the Rockafellers and other industrialists of the 19th century go, I suspect these aren't their real names. I suspect they were chosen to go and head this new empire.

Royalty is the right way to organize a society. Dictatorships and monarchies are a reflection of the antient's hierarchical organization.
Positions go to those who have favor with the rulers, as opposed to being elected.
Elections bring a false sense of how the world is. Democracy misleads people.
Which is why the disfavored rejects were sent to the shores of America::To keep them on the wrong path.

Jews maim the body formed in the image of "god", and inflicted circumsision upon all other white people, as well as the evil that is Jewsus Christ.
I think about how Jews (were used to) created homosexuality among Slavics, retribution for the Holocaust.
Then I think of the Catholic Church and its troubles.
What connection is here between Jews and the Catholic church???
If it is their sinister motives that’s behind the evil that is Jesus Christ are they being used at all?
Perhaps it is them who are pulling strings.
Their centuries of slavery in Egypt proves their disfavor.
The Jew leaders decided to prey on the up-and-coming Europeans to try to fix their problems with the ruling elite, a recurring aspect of the elite's methodology.
Jews were ostracised for a reason.

Jewsus Christ is a religious figure of evil. The seperatist churches formed so they could still capture the rest of the white people, keeping them worshipping the wrong god.
And now they do it to disfavored people of color, Latinos and Asians, after centuries of preying upon them.

Since Buddism doesn't recongnize a god, the calls are never heard, and Chinese representation is instead selected by the thrones.
Budda was the Asian's Jesus Christ::: bad for the people. "They came up at the same time for a reason."

Simpson's foreshadowing::Helloween IV special, Flanders is Satan. "Last one you ever suspect."
"You'll see lots of nuns where you're going:::hell!!!" St. Wigham, Helloween VI, missionary work, destroying cultures.
Over and over, the Simpsons was a source of education and enlightenment, a target of ridicule by the system which wishes to conceal its secrets.

The advent of the modern Christmas was a brilliant move. It creates a vested interest among those who would prefer the Church of Evil be destroyed::::
As goes the Catholic Church so goes the majority of annual retail sales.
The similarity between the names "Santa" and "Satan" is no coincidence.

I believe Islam is the one true religion, and those misled christians who attack "god"'s most favored people will pay dearly one day.

Posted by grandpa stole bets

Wednesday, December 07, 2005 11:28:00 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home