Intellectual Back Flips
Wednesday, March 02, 2005
Posted by J. J. Jackson @ 9:17 PM
It comes as no surprise to myself that the Supreme Court doesn’t understand it’s role in America. And with other recent commentaries such as Men In Black by Mark Levin and the new book by former Chief Justice Roy Moore, I believe that the Supreme Court is coming under greater and greater scrutiny.
Now with the ruling of the Supreme Court by a count of 5-4 that forbids the execution of anyone under the age of 18, that observation becomes more apparent than ever. Left wingers can really drive you nuts. And when you have a couple of them on the highest court in the land it leads to a lot of head scratching and hair pulling trying to get them to make a reasoned point. Instead of spending their time looking at the law they spend their time doing intellectual back flips and finding any comment anywhere in the world that supports the conclusions that they desire prior to even hearing the case.
There is no other way to explain the SCOTUS citing an unratified United Nations treaty on the rights of the child and basically using as the argument for the wrongness of executing criminals under 18 the fact that there are few other countries that do it.
Well la de FREAKING da! Excuse me Mr. and Ms. Justices of the Supreme Court who think that you have powers you do not have, here are some very important questions you need to answer.
If the Constitution states that your authority only “shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made” how do you justify adding into that unratified treaties and foreign opinions? Do you not read the very document you are sworn to protect?
Second, under what finding of fact do you conclude that just because someone else doesn’t do something that therefore it is not a good thing to do? Is the United States not a sovereign country? If so (and it is by the way) how do you justify binding the United States to the opinions of other countries? Doesn’t that sort of defeat the purpose of a sovereign state?
Ginsberg, Kennedy, Brier, Stevens, and Souter don’t have the candle power to answer those questions. They are nothing more than political hacks, bound and determined to implement their predispositions upon the people of America. Who is to say that the other nations are right? Was it right as France and Germany stood by and watched Saddam Hussein murder thousands of his own people for his own jollies? And does that mean that since the United States didn’t sit idly by and acted against Saddam that the United States was wrong and should be punished? If you believe the drivel that 5 intellectually challenged Supreme Court Justices have just handed down on capital punishment you do.
We are to believe that a girl 16 years of age is smart enough and mature enough to make a decision to end the life of her baby. We are to believe that a boy 17 years of age is smart enough to make a decision to have sex and even smarter still to put a condom on his ding dong. But we are supposed to believe that a boy under 18 that premeditates a murder and carries out a murder where he drove a woman to the river, bound and gagged her and then threw her over the side to drown wasn’t mature enough to know what he was doing?
Boy, it must be great to be a liberal. It means that you don’t have to be consistent on ANYTHING!
If we don’t start weeding these liberals out of positions of power, this scatter shot approach is going to lead to lawlessness in America. It will lead to no firm basis of any law upon which to build but merely a hodgepodge of nonsensical opinions that can be used to justify any ruling of Supreme Court Justices desiring to be social engineers choose.
Leave a comment if you like! *Note if you are a left wing, tin hat wearing, pro-Marxist loon that likes to post "anonymously" you will be treated like the kook you are!