SUPREME COURT ON THE VERGE

You remember a few weeks ago I talked about how we can't lose sight of the fact that we'll be electing a Supreme Court (and federal judiciary) when we go to the polls. When you vote for a president and a senator, you're deciding if you want raving maniacs and narrow, obsessed ideologues like Scalia, Alito and Thomas or a thoughtful and balanced woman like Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

And as much as Republican incumbents try painting themselves as "moderate" and "independent" in the 5th year of their 6 year terms, they all have voting records you can check. And you know what? Every single Republican senator-- no exceptions-- rubber stamped every single insane Bush judicial appointment-- no exceptions. So when you hear Susan Collins (R-ME), Norm Coleman (R-MN), John Sununu (R-NH), or Gordon Smith (R-OR) tell you how moderate and independent they are ask them to name just one Bush judicial nominee that they voted against... just one.

And as for the 11 little white twerps who would be president, they all running around like chickens without heads telling the furthest right extremists in their sick, sick party how they'll only nominate far right judicial activists for judgeships. Today Ralph Neas of People For the American Way reminds us that "during the 2000 campaign, President George W. Bush vowed to fill Supreme Court vacancies by choosing nominees in the mold of Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia. He has done exactly that-- Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito have consistently voted with their right-wing counterparts to undermine Americans’ rights and legal protections." Bush could not have gotten away with it without the active support from fake-moderates like Collins, Coleman, Smith and Sununu-- senators who are no more "independent" than lock-step ideologues like John Cornyn, Larry Craig, Jim DeMint and James Inhofe (4 of the worst raving fascists in the U.S. Senate).

Confirming one or more additional right-wing justices in order to entrench a far-right majority on the Court for decades to come is an extremely high priority for Radical Right leaders. They are on the verge of a generations-long victory. And so they are demanding-– and getting-– pledges from Republican presidential candidates to give them the Court of their dreams.
 
For struggling minor GOP presidential candidates like former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee-– whose “personal hero on the court is Scalia”-– the issue is a way to try to tap into the right-wing base. But it is even more important for GOP front-runners like former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, Senator John McCain and former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney-– all of whom face resistance among right-wing evangelicals. For them, pledging to nominate right-wing justices is a way of reaching out to that possibly elusive base.
 
Giuliani, leading in many polls but adamantly opposed by some Radical Right leaders like James Dobson, recently reaffirmed his qualified support for reproductive choice. But he was quick to applaud the Carhart ruling and has repeatedly vowed to nominate justices in the mold of Scalia, Thomas, Roberts, and Alito. Here is how Giuliani explained his position to right-wing commentator Hugh Hewitt:
 
HH: A pro-life voter looking at you, knowing that you’re pro-choice, but not concerned that presidents really matter so much in that, except as far as judges are concerned, what do you tell them about who you’re going to be putting on the federal bench?
 
RG: I’m going to say I’d put people like… I mean, the best way to do it is to just say I would, I could just have easily have appointed Samuel Alito or Chief Justice Roberts as President Bush did, in fact. I’d have been pretty proud of myself if I had been smart enough to make that choice if I were the president.
 
HH: Do you expect justices like Roberts and Alito to come out of a Giuliani administration?
 
RG: I hope. I mean, that would be my goal. I mean, they’re sort of a very high standard, and so is Justices Scalia and Thomas. That would be the kind of judges I would look for, both in terms of their background and their integrity, but also the intellectual honesty with which they interpret the law.
 
Giuliani has pledged to nominate “strict constructionist judges,” which is right-wing code for justices like Scalia and Thomas who would overturn Roe v. Wade and many other key rulings that affirm rights and freedoms that Americans take for granted. In the April 11th issue of National Review, Michael New recommended a “pro-life strategy” for Giuliani: “[m]ost importantly, candidate Giuliani should repeatedly pledge to appoint Supreme Court judges in the mold of Scalia and Thomas.” Giuliani has apparently taken this advice to heart, but he has hardly been alone in pandering to the far right on judicial nominations.
 
McCain went out of his way to introduce the issue at the GOP presidential debate held in early May at the Reagan Library. In response to a throwaway question from Chris Matthews about whether it would be good for the nation to have Bill Clinton living in the White House again, McCain made an explicit appeal:
 
"No, because it obviously would mean that Senator Clinton is the president of the United States, and we don’t want that. Most importantly, it would mean that the appointment of Supreme Court justices and other judges would be-– take a very sharp turn to the left. One of our greatest problems in America today is justices that legislate from the bench, activist judges. I’m proud that we have Justice Alito and Roberts on the United States Supreme Court."
 
Right-wing media outlets have drilled the candidates so frequently on judges that they have their pitches down pat. When National Review’s Ramesh Ponnuru asked McCain if he admires any Supreme Court justice in particular, he answered “of course, Antonin Scalia…I admire how articulate he is, but I also from everything I’ve seen admire Roberts as well.” And when Romney was asked by the right-wing blog RedState what sort of judges he would nominate, he replied:
 
"I think the justices that President Bush has appointed are exactly spot-on. I think Justice Roberts and Justice Alito are exactly the kind of justices America needs. They’re people who believe that the Constitution is what they’re to follow, not what they’re to depart from; people who do not believe that legislation from the bench is the responsibility or authority of being on the bench."
 
Undeclared candidate Fred Thompson-– a former senator best known for his role on Law and Order-– has not missed a beat either. Thompson, who played a role in ushering Roberts to confirmation, recently appeared on Fox News Sunday and stated:
 
“I think Roe vs. Wade was bad law and bad medical science. And the way to address that is through good judges. I don't think the Court ought to wake up one day and make new social policy for the country. It's contrary to what it's been the past 200 years. We have a process in this country to do that. Judges shouldn't be doing that. That's what happened in that case. I think it was wrong.”

These guys aren't playing around. If you want an end to choice and an end to individual rights vis a vis corporate power, be sure to vote straight Republican. And don't forget GOP rubber stamps like Susan Collins, John Sununu, Norm Coleman and Gordon Smith who have never, not once, met an extremist maniac vomited up by the Bush Regime who they weren't ready to vote for. NOT ONCE.