Liberals are fretting over who President Bush will nominate to replace a retiring Justice Sandra Day O’Connor. For them prospect of Justice O’Connor who has only at times been a friend to Constitution being replaced with a truly qualified Supreme Court Justice is terrifying. She has flirted with liberal ideology enough over her tenure that left has gone from completely opposed to her to promoting need to replace her in kind because mere thought of her replacement being to “right” of this “moderate” brings them feelings of dread and despair. At least with a “moderate” on court like Justice O’Connor they can still win victories for their ideology.
So liberals are out in force calling for a nominee that will unite America. And to be honest, I agree … somewhat.
When liberals talk about “uniting” America they mean someone that is agreeable to all sides be they right or wrong. The problem is however that this isn’t possible. You cannot nominate someone that is acceptable to constitutionalists like my self who seek a nominee that will actually enforce law and not make law and also someone that at same time is acceptable to those that want a nominee who will create a new law and then enforce that new law. Sorry, but it just isn’t going to happen.
I don’t find it odd that this is vain tactic of left; to call for unity of all ideas no matter how opposed they are to each other. But where was call from these same elite liberals when a then President Bill Clinton put up for nomination famous rewriter of Constitution Ruth Bader Ginsberg? I don’t remember them asking Bill Clinton to nominate a Justice that was acceptable to us Constitutionalists and “unite” America. And that is because they didn’t.
But like I said before, I do sort of agree that we need to unite America with Justice O’Connor’s replacement. President Bush should nominate someone that is able to “unite” Americans but realizing that just because people live here and claim citizenship here that they are not necessarily “Americans”.