Thursday, October 06, 2005

The Great Supreme Court Conspiracy Theory   Okay, I hate conspiracy theories; probably more than most people. But try this one on as fiction; a fable if you will...   President Bush, reeling from Katrina, FEMA, Iraq and the consequences of his incompetence, cronyism, craven political ambitions and lack of moral or intellectual center realizes that he is about to be a lame duck. He has only one chance to leave a legacy: reverse Roe v. Wade.  I assume at this point he turns to Karl Rove for advice, and this is what they cook up: let's find someone we know will vote to reverse not only Roe but also Lawrence, but who no one else knows at all. Everyone knows the president likes to appoint buddies, so it will be no surprise to nominate a trusted adviser. We want one with virtually no record and whose entire correspondence with the president comes under "Executive Privilege."  Now, how do we shove this through the senate? Ahhh.... Here's the kicker, we play the conservatives like a cello thereby causing the liberals to harmonize with our song. Specifically, we intimate (or even better, let others intimate) that our candidate may not be rock solid on abortion ,and we sit back and let the right wing howl for a while.  As the vote approaches we'll make quiet contact with each Republican senator to explain that we know this person well <wink wink> and you really can trust us <nudge nudge>. By the time the vote comes to the floor, the Democrats are thinking "well, if the right wing is this worried, how bad can she be? Let's treat her as a consensus candidate and we can walk out saying "we won - we forced the President to the center". Once confirmed, there's no turning back, and whatever else happens to the country under President Bush's leadership (using the term loosely) , the history books will show that he helped turn the social tide by his pivotal Supreme Court picks, aided and abetted by the hapless democrats.  Just a thought experiment, I'm sure that it can't be true. 1:51:51 PM    comment []

Unpublished Letter To the Editor re: Same Sex Marriage Petition Drive   The Concord Journal (here in Massachusetts) recently ran a letter to the editor supporting the petition drive to make same-sex marriage unconstitutional I wrote a letter to the editor that they did not choose to publish, but then, that is what blogs are for; so here you go... Tp The Editor, I am writing in response to the letter of September 29 advocating support for a citizen's petition to make same-sex marriage unconstitutional in Massachusetts. Census figures show that 8,000 Massachusetts children live with same-sex parents. Are these children better off (and is our state better off) if their parents' marriages are dissolved by this amendment? Will the lives of these children be improved by declaring their families illegitimate? Who benefits and at what cost? It was asserted that same-sex marriage undermines "the sanctity of traditional marriage." While anecdotes can prove almost anything, every scientific study has shown that same-sex marriage has no affect on the rate of heterosexual marriage nor on the rate of divorce, as we have seen with our own eyes this year in Massachusetts. Further, no law forces any church to recognize a divorce or a same-sex marriage; these are civil, not religious matters. Many who argue for this amendment appear outraged that such an important decision was made by a court, and not by a vote of the public. But the very point of having a constitution is to limit what the majority may do, and the more despised and marginalized the minority, the more important it is that the court steps in to offer protection. We saw this in 1967 when the US Supreme Court overturned all laws prohibiting "interracial marriage," even though these laws were passed by legislators and voters. At the time, over 90% of Americans were opposed to the Supreme Court's decision, but the nation's constitution was not amended to enshrine racism. It is my fervent hope that the people of Massachusetts will not vote to amend our own constitution to make it an instrument of destruction for thousands of families. Thank you, Jesse Liberty 1:17:58 PM    comment []