Wow, that was fast. The only thing faster than the speed of light is Ted Kennedy's rush to grab the spotlight.
Too bad that idea didn't occur to him 35 years ago. But I digress.
The echoes from the press conference announcing the Justice O'Conner was stepping down hadn't even finished ringing from the walls before Teddy grabbed a mic, proclaiming that unless President Bush picked a Justice given the seal of approval by liberals, that there would be a fight in the Senate.
Well, bring it on, big man. I've got news for you; the Kelo decision just made sure that the next Supreme Court Justice will be a constructionist, not a revisionist jerk who believes that the Constitution is an out of date document that must be "reinterpreted" in light of today's culture. See, I don't look at the Constitution is a fashion statement. It wasn't written simply for 18th century America; it was carefully constructed and written to apply to all Americans throughout the ages. And if by some chance times did change so much, or a flaw was discovered in the original, a mechanism was included to update or amend it.
You're familiar with that word, are you not? Amend, meaning to change or update? See the Founding Fathers were smart enough to leave future generations some flexibility in case it was needed. They were also smart enough to realize that fools and dolts like you, Teddy, would pervert and distort the Constitution with amendments for personal and political gain if it were easy to change, so they made it hard to amend. What they were unable to account for, sadly, was the rapidity with which corruption and arrogance would overtake the highest levels of the judiciary, when in Marbury v Madison, the Supreme Court arrogantly declared that it was their right to interpret the meaning of the Constitution and that their interpretation was sovereign over the Legislative and Executive branches of the government. So much for the checks and balances principle.
So here we are today with a Supreme Court that just decided that private property is really public property in disguise; that government has the right to take private property from its owner and give it to another private owner.
You know, you can hide the tax burden through withholding; it's hard to hide taking a man's house away. They tend to notice.
And the fact that the vast majority of Democratic members of the House voted against a bill to ban federal funding for any project that used eminent domain for a profit raising purpose (like, enhancing the tax base) means that you and your congressional colleagues are way out of step with the American people on this one.
Yeah, I know, big surprise there.
I suspect that in any hearings for the candidates, the Kelo decision is bound to come up and the American People, you know, the folks you claim to be protecting, are going to be listening very carefully. If a candidate does not stand strongly for property rights, well, he's not going to get a lot of public support.
Personally, I don't give a damn if the next justice is conservative or liberal; as long as he views the Constitution as the source of all law and not as toilet paper to wipe his butt on after he finishes crapping on us peons, I'll be all for him.
Or her.