Umm, on that empathy thingie...
... the shorter Orrin Hatch: We've been tryin' for decades to pass laws to benefit our wealthy old white male friends and the wealthy corporations that make them wealthier and, by gum, we're not gonna tolerate anyone who even thinks of bringing quaint notions about justice to matters of the law.
Orrin Hatch and his ilk are the same people who believe that an aberrant soul such as Antonin Scalia (who defended his decision in Herrera v. Collins by saying it was okay to execute an innocent man if proper procedure were followed) is a model of modern jurisprudence.
The odd thing, of course, is that not very many conservatives are willing to broach the subject that the supposed "strict constructionists" were the ones that threw the 2000 election to George W. Bush by judicial sleight-of-hand, nor are they going to admit that such was done with such rank partisanship for radical conservative principles that the decision made their own epithet, "activist judges," seem puny by comparison.
Anything that threatens what these wrinkled and wizened old white males consider the natural order of things is going to be fought by them--in every dirty way possible. They will ignore every legitimate charge of hypocrisy, large and small, in order to protect a judicial system that's fast becoming as corrupt as they are. After all, they are the ones who enabled its current composition.
What's kind of funny is that, despite fairly solid evidence that they've gamed the system, they're still blathering on about high principles, as if anyone but the mentally halt and lame were still thinking they possessed honor.
Orrin Hatch and his ilk are the same people who believe that an aberrant soul such as Antonin Scalia (who defended his decision in Herrera v. Collins by saying it was okay to execute an innocent man if proper procedure were followed) is a model of modern jurisprudence.
The odd thing, of course, is that not very many conservatives are willing to broach the subject that the supposed "strict constructionists" were the ones that threw the 2000 election to George W. Bush by judicial sleight-of-hand, nor are they going to admit that such was done with such rank partisanship for radical conservative principles that the decision made their own epithet, "activist judges," seem puny by comparison.
Anything that threatens what these wrinkled and wizened old white males consider the natural order of things is going to be fought by them--in every dirty way possible. They will ignore every legitimate charge of hypocrisy, large and small, in order to protect a judicial system that's fast becoming as corrupt as they are. After all, they are the ones who enabled its current composition.
What's kind of funny is that, despite fairly solid evidence that they've gamed the system, they're still blathering on about high principles, as if anyone but the mentally halt and lame were still thinking they possessed honor.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home