RULE OF LAW or RULE OF "TOUCHY-FEELY"?
The United States has strayed from the path of the true purpose of law, as envisioned by our founding fathers. You can see this in the very fact that the talking heads, the pundits, and the msm are discussing the next Supreme Court justice in terms of group "representation", instead of the weighty responsibility of appointing someone to sit for life on the highest court in the land.
Since Justice Souter announced his pending retirement, giving Obama his first opportunity to appoint someone to the high court, everyone is speculating about whether the next nominee will be a woman, a Hispanic or whatever, but they are really missing the point.
The very fact that Obama has made "empathy" with certain groups one of his main criteria for choosing a Supreme Court nominee is a dangerous sign of how much further the Supreme Court may be pushed away from the rule of law and toward even more arbitrary judicial edicts to advance the socialistic agenda of the liberal left and set it in legal stone completely immune from the democratic process.
The 14th Amendment, which guarantees "equal protection under the law" for all Americans, would be, for all practical purposes, repealed if enough Supreme Court justices with "empathy" for particular groups are appointed. We will have entered a whole new legal world where everybody is equal but some are more equal then others. We have already embarked on that road with the various "hate crimes" legislation. The very idea of the rule of law would become meaningless when it is replaced by the "Touchy-Feely" empathies of judges.
People who just accept soothing words from politicians they are infatuated with are gambling with their futures and the future of thew United States. Barack Obama uses rhetoric to sweet talk his way into getting what he wants. If you believe in the rule of law, he will say the words "RULE OF LAW." And if you are willing to buy it, he will keep on selling it.
Currently, under our Constitutional form of government, presidential term limits restrict how long any given resident of the White House can damage this country directly. But that does not limit how long, or much, the people he appoints to the Supreme Court can continue to damage this country, which often goes on for decades after the president who appointed them is long gone, for instance justice John Paul Stevens virtually destroyed the Constitution's restrictions on government officials' ability to confiscate private property in his 2005 decision in the case of Kelo v. New London --- 30 years after having been appointed by President Ford.
The biggest danger in appointing the wrong people to the Supreme Court is not just in how they might vote on some particular issue --- whether private property, abortion or whatever. The biggest danger is that they will undermine or destroy the very concept of the rule of law --- what has been called a "government of laws and not of men."
Under the American system of government, this cannot be done overnight or perhaps even during the terms in office of one president --- but it can be done. And it can be done over time by the appointees of just one president, if he gets enough appointees.
The majority of the pundits say that who Barack Obama appoints to replace justice Souter doesn't really matter, because Souter is a liberal who will probably be replaced by another liberal. But, if no one sounds the alarm now, we can end up with a series of appointees with "empathy" --- which is to say, with justices who think their job is to "relieve the distress" of particular groups, rather then uphold the Constitution of the United states.
If you have noticed, the statue of Justice wears a blindfold and there is a reason for that. There are things that courts are not supposed to see or recognize when making their decisions, such as race, whether you are rich or poor, male or female, straight or gay or any other personal things that could bias decisions of judges and juries. This is the ideal which a society strives for, even if particular judges or juries fall short of that ideal. But Barack Hussein Obama is repudiating this ideal by declaring that he wants to appoint judges with "empathy" for particular groups. Obama said the same thing during last year's election campaign. Moreover, it is completely consistent with his behavior and associations over a period of years -- and inconsistent with fundamental principles of American government and society.
This is not Obama's only attempt to remake American society. His vision of America is one in which a president of the United States can fire the head of General Motors, tell banks how to bank, control the medical system, and take charge of all sorts of other activities for which he nor other politicians have any expertise or experience. The Constitution of the United States gives no president, nor the entire federal government, the authority to do such things. But spending trillions of taxpayer dollars to bail out all sorts of companiesseems to buy the power to tell them how to operate.
Appointing judges to the federal courts -- including the Supreme Court -- who believe in expanding the powers of the federal government to make arbitrary decisions, choosing who will be winners and losers in the economy and in the society, is perfectly consistent with a vision of the world where self-confident and self-righteous elites rule according to their own notions, instead of merely governing under the restraints of the Constitution.
Obama uses pious talk about "empathy" to make it easier for the masses to swallow his bitter pill of socialism, and now that the Obama administration has a congressional majority that is virtually unstoppable, and a media that is wholly uncritical and unethical, our chances of preventing Obama from putting someone on the Supreme Court who shares his desires to turn America into a different country are slim to none.
The only thing on the side of those who understand this, and oppose it, is time. Reshaping the Supreme Court cannot be done overnight, the way Congress passed a vast spending bill in two days.
But with all of the indications already as to how the Obama administration is trying to remake America on many fronts, the time to begin alerting the public to the dangers is now.
But time itself does nothing. It is what we do with that time that matters most.
I DO NOT KNOW IF THE FOLLOWING IS TRUE OR NOT, BUT I THOUGHT I WOULD PASS IT ALONG JUST INCASE.
I understand that H.R. 1388 was passed in January, behind our backs. You may want to read about it. It wasn't mentioned on the news --- it just went by on the bottom ticker on CNN.
Obama is funding $20 million in taxpayer dollars to immigrate HAMAS REFUGEES to the U.S.
By executive order, Barack Obama has ordered the expenditure of $20.3 million in "migration assistance" to the Palestinian refugees and "conflict victims" in Gaza.
The "presidential determination", which allows hundreds of thousands of Palestinians with ties to Hamas to resettle in the United States, was signed on January 27 and appeared in the Federal Register on Feburary 4.
Few on Capitol Hill or in the media, took note that the order provides a free ticket complete with housing and food allowances to individuals who have displayed their overwhelming support to the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas) in the Parlimentary election of January 2006.
Some of Barack Obama's most recent actions since his inauguration:
His first call to any head of state, as president, was to Mahoud Abbas, leader of the FATAH Party in the Palestinian territory:
His first one-on-one television interview with any news organization was with Al Arabia television:
His first executive order was to fund and facilitate abortions, not just here in the U.S., but around the world using taxpayer funds:
He ordered Guantanamo Bay closed and all military trials of detainees halted:
He withdrew all charges against the masterminds behind the USS Cole and the terror attack on 9/11:
And now we learn that he is allowing hundreds of thousands of Palestinians to live in U.S. at our expense.
WE ARE LOSING OUR COUNTRY AT A RAPID PACE!
No comments:
Post a Comment