OK. Here's one of those silly little questions that the Left can't see far enough ahead to avoid:
They say that Sandra Day O'Connor was a moderate (yeah, right) so, therefore, we should replace her with another moderate.
Does that mean that when William Rehnquist, a Conservative, retires, that the Left is going to want him replaced him with another Conservative?
What are the odds?
I also keep hearing that we should replace O'Connor with another woman. Or that we should get an Hispanic on the Court. Hell, why not a black, dyslexic, lesbian Easter Island descendant in a wheelchair?
I have an idea that's so crazy that it just might work: how about replacing O'Connor with the best man or woman for the job?
Political correctness has become so ingrained in this country that nobody ever thinks about that question anymore. Scary. And disgusting.
The Left wants President Bush to nominate a "moderate" (i.e. someone slightly to the Left of Karl Marx) to the court. Anyone else would be "too extreme".
Apparently Ruth Bader Ginsburg wasn't "extreme" enough for the Democrats to scream bloody murder. She was only a lawyer for that notoriously moderate organization the ACLU!
Apparently, if you fight against everything that America stands for, that doesn't make you an extremist.
Liberal extremists good, Conservative extremists bad. Remember that next time any Democrat speaks the word, "moderate".
*Hell, why not a black, dyslexic, lesbian Easter Island descendant in a wheelchair?*
ReplyDeleteOnly is he/she/it would promise not to overturn Roe.
Heh. In Time Magazine last week, they did a feature on the Court complete with colors that were supposed to indicate how conservative (light red=moderate conservative, dark red=staunch) and how liberal (dark blue=staunch, light blue=mod lib). They had Ruth Bader Ginsberg with a light blue color.
HAHAHAHA. She wasn't just a lawyer for the ACLU, she was the head of the ACLU!