June 2009


Based on their governance and legislative performance over the past 6 months, it is more-than-apparent that the Democrats in power — from Obama to the lowliest back bencher in the Congress — have little respect or allegiance to individual American citizens. They promise us goodies in a Robin Hoodian and Santa Clausian manner, and we will reward them with a long, fat career that helps them avoid the real work and heavy-lifting found in the private sector. It is a classical symbiotic relationship where we, unfortunately, take on the roll of the remoras picking scraps off the lips of the big sharks swimming in the partisan political shark tank. These scraps are supposed to mollify and placate us…and guarantee them a seat in the legislature so long as they deliver “the goods.”

To them, we are merely plump votes, ripe for the picking. Period. We are useful idiots to them…and we have become a means to an end for them.

That end is, apparently, to change America, forever, from a meritocracy and capitalistic enterprise to an egalitarian free-for-all of confiscated and re-distributed largess. Damn the rich…damn the successful…damn the enterprising…damn those blessed with initiative and drive. How dare they be successful and enjoy the fruits of success when there are so many deserving layabouts and malingerers who deserve similar success? So what if they didn’t expend any energy or toil and make personal sacrifices? The fact that they didn’t “make it” isn’t their fault: They we’re merely victims of life’s lottery and shouldn’t be penalized by such trifles as merit and initiative. This is especially true when those superhero Democrats can level the playing field with the strokes of several pens, so to speak, and legislate “fairness.”

But isn’t it apparent with all their overly hyped “stimulus” legislation, their incredibly short-sighted cap-and-trade legislation, their grab at controlling our health care, and the federal bailout and subsequent control of many of our important industries that first-and-foremost that they think that we are idiots? Or at the very least simpering fools who can’t control our own affairs?

Are we really just idiots with deep pockets? Perhaps we are!

The only way to change this mindset of our legislators is to really change (sorry Obama!) the modus operandi of politics in Washington, DC.

What we need in Washington, instead of power-grabbing legislative sessions resulting in onerous legislation, are mandatory Constitution reading sessions by the members of the House and the Senate. All these political players, men and women of gigantic statures at least in their own minds, need to be constantly reminded to whom they owe their fealty [That would be to US, the people!] They also need to be reminded and instructed by the only set of rules and regulations that they should operate and legislate within [That would be the CONSTITUTION of the United States of America.]

For far too long our legislators and erstwhile leaders have operated and governed as though the Constitution were a compendium of suggestions and pesky afterthoughts, rather than as though it were a rigid set of mandates as was intended by the Founders. It is obvious from the way that this President and this Congress (in particular) plays fast-and-loose with our rights, freedoms and liberties that they need to be (constantly) reminded of their Constitutional responsibilities. Call it remedial Constitutional awareness.

I bet if they were made more Constitutionally-aware, then we might perhaps see far less of the legislative power grabs and more legislation that actually protects our rights and liberties. Perhaps we might even see legislators instilled with more courage and less partisan loyalty — and legislators who might, God forbid, consider terms limits for the members of both houses of Congress. Maybe they might see that public service is Constitutionally better than craven politics and that public service honors we citizens in a much better fashion. They might also find out that if they were unencumbered from the constant campaigning for re-election, they could go out among the folks that they represent and have honest and meaningful dialogs with them instead of the pablum and the pandering required to curry favor (and votes.)

They might also find out that we’re not idiots. We’ve got sensible voices and what we say is worthy of their consideration and their legislative action.

Hey, a guy can dream can’t he??

The nomination of Court of Appeals Justice Sonia Sotomayor by President Barak Obama should be a troubling occurrence to all those individuals who value a judicial interpretation of the Constitution based on Constitutional principles and not based on emotion or other non-legal factors. The trouble with Judge Sotomayor resides in several areas: Her previous (let us say) controversial comments regarding her superior jurisprudence due to her gender and Hispanic heritage; Her approximate 60% reversal rate on her rulings; And her ruling on the New Haven firefighter’s exam in the Ricci v. DeStefano case.

Sotomayor is being sold by Obama and the Democrats as a perfect candidate, albeit her obvious flaws. According to Harry Reid, she’s “the whole package.” However, at the same time White House spokesman Robert Gibbs warned the critics of Sotomayor to “be careful” in their criticisms of her.

You’ve got to be kidding? Handle her with kid gloves? The Democrats have raised the practice of double standard to a high art form. Add in their hypocrisy, and their actions and reactions in this matter become almost laughable. And they would be laughable if the stakes weren’t so high, and if here were no historical precedents to contradict their present day actions regarding the nomination of Supreme Court justices.

What about their concern for the dignity of past candidates, and the “richness of their life experiences?” What about Robert Bork, the brilliant legal mind whose reputation was utterly destroyed by the despicable Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-MA)? Judge Bork, who was nominated by President Reagan, was literally excoriated by Kennedy during a televised speech entitled “Robert Bork’s America” from the senate floor:

“Robert Bork’s America is a land in which women would be forced into back-alley abortions, blacks would sit at segregated lunch counters, rogue police could break down citizens’ doors in midnight raids, schoolchildren could not be taught about evolution, writers and artists could be censored at the whim of the Government, and the doors of the Federal courts would be shut on the fingers of millions of citizens for whom the judiciary is — and is often the only — protector of the individual rights that are the heart of our democracy… President Reagan is still our president. But he should not be able to reach out from the muck of Irangate, reach into the muck of Watergate and impose his reactionary vision of the Constitution on the Supreme Court and the next generation of Americans. No justice would be better than this injustice.”

I’m sure that beyond his words that Kennedy held this fine man, Robert Bork, in the highest esteem. Yeah, right! And to add insult to injury, Kennedy’s senate colleague at the time, Joseph Biden (D-DE), released a scurrilous, patently false and slanderous report on Judge Bork called The Biden Report. This “report” made all manner of false claims and made dire speculations about the jurisprudence of Justice Bork once he had been elevated to the Supreme Court. Where was the “careful” treatment of Judge Bork by the hyper-partisan Democrats?

Now let’s look at the unsuccessful nomination of Miguel Estrada to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit by President George W. Bush. A highly qualified jurist of impeccable education pedigree and judicial experience, Judge Estrada also possessed a “richness of life experiences” that exceeded those touted for Sotomayor. Indeed, this Hispanic candidate was seen as a potential future candidate for the Supreme Court. But, in their simultaneously respectful and careful manner, the Democrats successfully filibustered the nomination of Judge Estrada…and he withdrew his nomination…even though he was eminently qualified and had the requisite compelling personal background.

It is interesting to note that the Democrats were concerned and vigorously agitated over President Bush gaining “points” with Hispanic voters because of a successful Estrada nomination process. So this concern did not stop them from a full frontal assault on Judge Estrada and, in the spirit of Judge Bork, once again sacrificing this good man’s reputation for their less-than-honorable motives.

Now, let’s look at another situation dripping with contradiction and hypocrisy. Consider the situation of former Senator George Allen, a man whose reputation and political fortunes were ruined by his utterance of a single word. Unlike Judge Sotomayor, whose words were unequivocal and unambiguous, then senate candidate for re-election Allen was at a rally when he used the word “macaca” when calling out to his rival’s campaign worked shadowing him. Allen’s candidacy was targeted by the DNC as “vulnerable” and he was being challenged by former Secretary of the Navy James Webb.

The word “macaca” is an obscure slur indeed — in fact unknown in the US and meaningless to citizens here. However, the Democrats used this gaffe by Allen to their fullest benefit. Labeling Allen a racist in a vigorous media campaign, they turned a then 10 point Allen lead into a political horse race. James Webb eventually won the seat from Allen by a less than one percentage point margin, and this win turned control of the Senate to the Democrats.

My point with the Allen example is that his utterance of one word as a Republican political figure had great and grave consequences for him because of the persistence and obfuscation of Democrats. However, statements by Sotomayor that are offensive to many Americans and that can only be interpreted as racist, should be looked at as “mis-statements” and to be forgiven as unintended slights.

In the final analysis, Republicans get held to a higher level of public scrutiny. And they suffer greater consequences for perceived or fabricated transgressions. Democrats vigorously pursue Republicans and their surrogates and engage in shameless muckraking to further their political ambitions and plans. However, Democrats are held to a more neutral standard. Those Democrats who have made actual versus speculative transgressions are entitled to more benign, forgiving treatment. Those Republicans who would otherwise pursue these transgression are told to “be careful” or to back off their criticisms. And sometimes they will have the tables turned on them by the crafty Democrats and be accused of the very transgression(s) that they seek to reveal or investigate.

Hypocrisy, thy name is Democrat!

Republicans need to get as crafty as the Dems. They need to vigorously pursue transgressions that are in direct contravention to their beliefs and long-held values. Republicans cannot be held hostage to the specious cries of “racism” or any other “ism” that the Democrats use as a potent political weapon. Even though they find no succor or comfort in the media, they need to take their arguments directly to the people via the Internet or face-to-face. It makes their task much harder, but they cannot count on the untrustworthy media to give their concerns a fair airing.

Republicans need to try something new…something other than timidly slinking away when faced with ungodly Democratic opposition. They need to vigorously voice their opinions and to demand to be heard. They need to hold to their standards and convictions, and not compromise for convenience’s sake or as a political accommodation to the Democrats. They don’t, God forbid, need to become more Democrat-like. No, they need to speak with a righteous and unwavering voice for those things that are righteous and lawful.

And they need to start with Judge Sotomayor.