Wasting Time With Alex

About the Sotomayor nomination..

Andrew McCarthy hits it out of the ballpark when he points out that Obama’s appointment of Sotomayor clearly illustrates his belief that what matter isn’t the rule of law, but the rule of lawyers. In short, Obama’s vision of government, not as an entity given certain responsibilities and a whole lot of restrictions in our constitution, but as the final arbiter and dispenser of justice, is what this nomination was all about. It’s about pushing the agenda, not the rule of law at all.

Our ideal of judging was perhaps best explained by John Roberts during his 2005 confirmation hearings. The judge is like an umpire, Roberts mused. The umpire calls balls and strikes; he doesn’t design or alter the rules of the game. That’s how it’s supposed to work. The judge’s courtroom is the level playing field where even the visiting team can win if the law — the objective law — is on its side. Sure, the crowd and the local paper will root, root, root for the home team. The rules, however, don’t have a rooting interest. Justice is blind. The umpire is there to see that justice is done — not manufactured.

Which is precisely why people that feel and believe like Obama, hate this country. They do not want a level playing field and a system of equal rules applying to all. They want a system that redresses those injustices they perceive exist and that guarantees equality of results to all, no matter how many bad and stupid choices these idiots make. That’s precisely why Sotomayor was chosen:

Judge Sotomayor is unabashed in claiming license to judge, and, indeed, to make law, in accordance with her feelings and her politics, which are decidedly leftist. For her, the nation’s appellate courts are the places “where policy is made” by judges, not the places where policy already made by the public is applied by judges. And as she proclaimed in a 2002 speech, legal decisions by judges of her background should be affected by their “experiences as women and people of color.” She insisted, in fact, that “a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experience would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life.”

In short she will do what the left loves: legislate – in favor of leftist ideology – from the bench. Our legal system has been dealt another blow by people that prefer the rule of lawyers over the rule of law. These are the people that would see someone like Obama trampling the constitution and figure that because he means well (or is helping the cause), he should be allowed to do what he’s doing. Like take money/debt owed to investors by some private corporate entity, and transfer majority ownership of the entity to his supporters/donors, the unions.

A truly wise judge would know the rule of law doesn’t change depending on whether it’s being read by a Latina woman or by a white male — but the rule of lawyers does.

Word!