The Pendragon's Hall

Bush isn't letting any grass grow under his feet. With the High Court's living testimony to the limits of gender equality getting ready to retire, he has moved to replace her with a solid, constructionalist justice who will "interpret" the laws, and not make them. Unfortunately for liberals, he is also a highly-qualified judge. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) admitted he is not a "filibuster-able" judge (it's always highly amusing to watch them torture the English language, these people who sneer about "misunderestimate"). Teddy Kennedy wants to know if he will be able to remove his personal ideology from "the rule of law." I rather think it would be better for liberals if he didn't, since "rule of law" isn't part of their own ideology. The limited fuss Democrats have been unable to raise thus far (and they will keep trying, believe me you) only proves something we have long suspected: liberals want to impose a litmus test on the judiciary, to squash state's rights (unless it happens to be state court's rights, then all bets are off), to uphold the right of a woman to murder her unborn baby in any and every conceivable circumstance, to allow same-sex marriage and to enforce universities accept a certain quotia of unqualified minority students simply because they are minorities. Bush, according to all reports, did not ask John Roberts any of these questions. He knows the man's record as a constructionalist from a constitutional perspective and is satisfied he will do a good job. I am, as well. This latest development has proved that Bush still hasn't learned from his recent years in office, which is a very good thing for America.