Wednesday, November 02, 2005

Great, kids -- DON'T GET COCKY!

Looks like the conservative punditocracy is getting what it wanted, with the nominaton of Sam Alito to the SCOTUS.

I will say this ... based on what I am hearing about him, I'll back the guy. He definitely appears to be a strong candidate, with a more obvious pedigree than Harriet Miers in terms of his judicial philosophy.

And, if, as Froggy says:
"You know it’s a good nomination when all the right people are pissed
off about it. Just like voting for the California initiatives, looking at
the opponents is probably more revealing than looking at the
Sam Alito is downright GOLDEN!

The meltdown is unprecedented ... from the statements of all the usual whiners on the Left (click Froggy's link above for examples), to the supposedly-unrelated (yeah, right ...) grandstanding of calling for a closed Senate session to discuss the investigation of our intelligence failures, the opposition is falling all over itself to regain control of shaping the agenda in the media after Alito's nomination (and Rove's non-indictment, and the recent successes in Iraq ...).

Harry Reid et. al. had better watch themselves ... for if they seek to return to Daschleesque obstruction as the order of the day, they will wind up just like ol' Tom.

Now, to reinforce my paraphrase of Han Solo in the original Star Wars, (and the reason I supported Harriet Miers in the first place) let me add another quote from that movie ... from an unnamed pilot, during the final attack on the Death Star:

Stay on target ... stay on target ... stay on target ...

If we conservatives try to spread this fight over the whole breadth of the conflict between Leftism and conservatism ... if we push Sam Alito only as one who will "vote right" on the various issues that are the focal points of that conflict (abortion, gun control, affirmative acton, even terrorism) -- we might win this battle, but risk losing the American people ... and the political war ... and even risk losing the War on Terror.

Keep in mind that MANY Americans (1) are comfortable with a measure of judicial activism and (2) are very uncomfortable with a fanatic pursuit of idelological purity -- from Left or Right. If this battle is not focused upon one central issue -- the issue that will, if set right, lead to the proper sequence of events for resolving all the issues listed in the last paragraph -- we risk a retreat of the American people from sound principle, and will see them return to the "comfort food" of 1960's idealism that weakened our nation and retarded real progress.

We must keep the debate focused on one thing, and one thing alone ...

.., do we want judges who respect the Constitution, and uphold the balance of power it establishes by not reaching beyond the role defined in it for the judiciary -- sharing the responsibility AND authority for the pursuit of justice with the other branches of our government, including changing the Constitution for changing times by the mechanisms it provides ...

... or do we want judges who believe that they must force "justice" (as they see it that day) upon every situation that comes before them -- even if it means the short-circuiting of representative government, and the Constitution itself?


(BTW ... to assist your targeting, I have added one more name to the blogroll today -- someone who often scoops everyone else when it comes to reporting what history will say about today's events ... Victor Davis Hanson.)

Trackbacks posted at Froggy's, SMASH's report on the nomination, the Greyhawks open post, and with Don Surber's "smart... comments".

Comments: Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?