Wednesday, October 05, 2005
Strict Constructionists
I can't help but think that W's nomination of Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court is nothing but insurance against possible future indictments against himself -- hoping that his good bud and former lawyer will keep him out of prison.
Remember -- Caligula appointed his horse as an advisor.
But, in watching his press conference about the nomination today, I just wanted to bitch-slap this smirking fuck after every sentence. He kept harping on the concept of "Strict Construction", obviously without understanding it at all -- because a strict constructionist judge would rule against any laws or actions that prohibited free speech, that intruded on personal privacy, that allowed government money to go to any religious entity, that expanded governmental powers. Or, in other words, a Strict Constructionist judge would toss out all laws against abortion, against consensual acts between consenting adults. A Strict Constructionist judge would toss out the Patriot Act in a heartbeat, declare "under god" in the Pledge of Allegiance illegal, outlaw the funnelling of government cash post-Katrina to "faith-based" (read: fundamentalist Christian wingnut) organizations.
He also liked to whine about "legislating from the bench", but y'know what, Georgie-boy? A real judge can't help but doing so, in the sense that it is a judge's right and duty to strike down bad laws that defy the Constitution. You want to call it "legislating from the bench". Fine. I call it "checks and balances," one of the most important and sacred things that the Founding Fathers gave our form of government. They wanted to ensure that no one branch of government became too powerful, and they came up with a good way to do it. The Executive can override Congress, Congress can override the Executive, and the Supreme Court can override either.
But I'll tell you what, Georgie-boy: if you stop legislating from the White House, then I'll agree that judges should stop "legislating" from the bench. And if you actually bother to read the Constitution and figure out that your chosen form of religious stupidity is not the law of the land, and if you stop being such a smug, smirking fuck-monkey in public, then maybe I'll consider Harriet Miers's nomination seriously.
But, until then, I only see one thing. You needed to distract from all those indictments against prominent Republicans and your sinking poll numbers post-Katrina, and so you pulled a nomination out of your ass and tossed an old friend into the ring. Someone with no experience and no history -- although, apparently, a raving crazy, born-again, anti-abortion, anti-gay fucknut.
Oh yeah -- someone who was also involved with purging your past criminal history, and who personally handed you that infamous PDB on August 6th, 2001. You know -- the one that said, "bin Laden Determined to Strike in US"; the one that was much longer than the page and a half we were shown so long ago.
Or, in other words, the one woman who happens to know all kinds of dirt about you and your Administration, and who would be in a position to judge your fate were all that dirt to catch up with you and lead to impeachment.
Hm. John Roberts as Chief Justice -- hence presiding judge in impeachment -- and Harriet Miers as Chief Asskisser. Maybe you're not as stupid as we all think. After all, it was a warped Supreme Court that put you in office in the first place. Guess it was a logical conclusion to think that they'd be the only ones to keep you in it once the Senate and the People decide you should be out.
But I have a suggestion for you. Emulate that great Republican Idol Richard Nixon. Resign now, for the good of the country. Because I don't think you'll want to go down in history as the man who precipitated a major Constitutional crisis and had to be removed from office by the National Guard.
Remember -- Caligula appointed his horse as an advisor.
But, in watching his press conference about the nomination today, I just wanted to bitch-slap this smirking fuck after every sentence. He kept harping on the concept of "Strict Construction", obviously without understanding it at all -- because a strict constructionist judge would rule against any laws or actions that prohibited free speech, that intruded on personal privacy, that allowed government money to go to any religious entity, that expanded governmental powers. Or, in other words, a Strict Constructionist judge would toss out all laws against abortion, against consensual acts between consenting adults. A Strict Constructionist judge would toss out the Patriot Act in a heartbeat, declare "under god" in the Pledge of Allegiance illegal, outlaw the funnelling of government cash post-Katrina to "faith-based" (read: fundamentalist Christian wingnut) organizations.
He also liked to whine about "legislating from the bench", but y'know what, Georgie-boy? A real judge can't help but doing so, in the sense that it is a judge's right and duty to strike down bad laws that defy the Constitution. You want to call it "legislating from the bench". Fine. I call it "checks and balances," one of the most important and sacred things that the Founding Fathers gave our form of government. They wanted to ensure that no one branch of government became too powerful, and they came up with a good way to do it. The Executive can override Congress, Congress can override the Executive, and the Supreme Court can override either.
But I'll tell you what, Georgie-boy: if you stop legislating from the White House, then I'll agree that judges should stop "legislating" from the bench. And if you actually bother to read the Constitution and figure out that your chosen form of religious stupidity is not the law of the land, and if you stop being such a smug, smirking fuck-monkey in public, then maybe I'll consider Harriet Miers's nomination seriously.
But, until then, I only see one thing. You needed to distract from all those indictments against prominent Republicans and your sinking poll numbers post-Katrina, and so you pulled a nomination out of your ass and tossed an old friend into the ring. Someone with no experience and no history -- although, apparently, a raving crazy, born-again, anti-abortion, anti-gay fucknut.
Oh yeah -- someone who was also involved with purging your past criminal history, and who personally handed you that infamous PDB on August 6th, 2001. You know -- the one that said, "bin Laden Determined to Strike in US"; the one that was much longer than the page and a half we were shown so long ago.
Or, in other words, the one woman who happens to know all kinds of dirt about you and your Administration, and who would be in a position to judge your fate were all that dirt to catch up with you and lead to impeachment.
Hm. John Roberts as Chief Justice -- hence presiding judge in impeachment -- and Harriet Miers as Chief Asskisser. Maybe you're not as stupid as we all think. After all, it was a warped Supreme Court that put you in office in the first place. Guess it was a logical conclusion to think that they'd be the only ones to keep you in it once the Senate and the People decide you should be out.
But I have a suggestion for you. Emulate that great Republican Idol Richard Nixon. Resign now, for the good of the country. Because I don't think you'll want to go down in history as the man who precipitated a major Constitutional crisis and had to be removed from office by the National Guard.
Comments:
Post a Comment
