Recently, Politico published an op-ed by a conservative arguing “Democrats have been virtually flawless in appointing reliable liberals to the court. Yet Republicans, more often than not, appoint justices who vote with the other side on critical decisions.” Politico’s Arena asked if that formulation makes sense.
Another reading of the so-called “defections” of judges appointed by Republicans is that fair jurisprudence actually leans center-left. Except for the most ardent ideologues willing to contort the Founder’s intent to serve a narrow agenda, even politically conservative judges know the Constitution is meant to confer rights and benefits, not restrict them. Perhaps the sour grapes on the Right come not from a few failed efforts at vetting but from the creeping realization that their whims are on the wrong side of justice.
If you wanna show me some love on Politico’s page, please do. And what do you think?
In my latest Fox News opinion column, I write:
If you haven’t talked with one lately, most Republicans are up in arms that the media is covering several alleged bullying incidents by Mitt Romney when he was in high school. Conservatives allege that the liberal media is tearing Romney limb from limb while then-candidate Obama was never really vetted.
Exsqueeze me?
What’s behind their complaints?
Those who argue that President Obama was never vetted clearly aren’t referring to a process of information gathering and investigation, they’re referring to desired outcome that has yet and will not come. To them, it’s not that the vetting process happened and the president passed but, rather, that the process was flawed and never seriously took place yet. Sore losers, really.
NEW YORK TIMES PROFILE
SOCIALIZE WITH ME!
TV DOESN’T PAY THE BILLS
Make a tax-deductible contribution via our fiscal sponsor, the Grassroots Policy Project
