Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

WP: Liberals, Don't Make Her an Icon

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
many a good man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-10-05 09:42 PM
Original message
WP: Liberals, Don't Make Her an Icon
Liberals, Don't Make Her an Icon
By Edward Lazarus

Sunday, July 10, 2005; Page B03
LOS ANGELES

<snip

Liberal lobbying for an O'Connor-esque nominee carries a double shot of danger. First, it will serve to confirm and reinforce the conservative critique of liberals that, when it comes to the Constitution, they have no principles, only preferences that they want to impose on the nation. And, second, most of the time -- and usually when it really counts -- a conservative in the O'Connor mold will vote conservative, often extremely so. Remember Bush v. Gore ? That was a classic of unprincipled, case-specific, result-driven judging -- and the O'Connors of the world would be on board every time.

The liberals' search for the next O'Connor is already twisting them into intellectual pretzels. Who could have imagined, as Democrats appropriately skewered then Attorney General-designate Alberto Gonzales for his authorship of the notorious torture memos, that these same senators would be virtually praying for Bush to nominate him to the Supreme Court?

There is a root cause for this incoherence. It is the liberal obsession with Roe. Many on the left cherish O'Connor because she helped save Roe. They will confirm Gonzales because they hope he will do the same. And they will try to torpedo a more right-wing nominee -- as they did Robert Bork -- as an enemy of the right to privacy on which Roe is based.

Whatever the political benefits of this strategy, it sells the Democrats' intellectual souls. Roe is easily defended as good policy or, after 32 years, settled law. But as a matter of constitutional interpretation, even most liberal jurisprudes -- if you administer truth serum -- will tell you it is basically indefensible. Yet Democrats have made it a litmus test.

/snip>

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/08/AR2005070802261.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
justinsb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-10-05 09:46 PM
Response to Original message
1. What about John McCain
as a justice. You don't have to be a judge. McCain seems to be fairly centrist and fair minded and then the right wing of the GOP won't have to worry about McCain running for president.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
acmavm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-10-05 10:46 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Surely you jest?
.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu May 02nd 2024, 12:53 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC