Surprise! Republicans more principled

Whatever Republicans are, it would be hard to watch more than one senator on the Judiciary Committee question future Chief Justice John Roberts without being disgusted with the current democratic party.

Not only should they not be called liberal because their views have absolutely nothing to do with liberalism as its been advanced the past three hundred years, they aren't even worthy to be called democrats, as that word implies a proponent of demcracy. The force of their ideas is so miniscule that even senators from their own party are resigned to the fact that there is no way to implement their agenda other than untouchable court edicts, and that power is certainly being eroded.

I am no social conservative. I would support legislators allowing civil unions for gays out of principle that the government can't restrict advantages given to couples to a man and a woman. I would overturn Roe v. Wade not to recognize life at conception but to return to the period of state and legislative decisions before 1973. I am for a much more open immigration policies in order to give more people around the world a chance at the American dream. But those aren't cases for the courts to decide.

Democrats know their ideas, their view of the world, bears no resemblance to reality. They know their preferences run counter to the Constitution and to any legal or scientific principles (hello? free trade anyone?).

The only reason to yell and sob and whine over one of the most qualified judges to ever be nominated for the supreme court is that democrats realize the end is near for activism and social policy from the bench. The courts--with lifetime appointments and decisions based on laws made by elected officials-are not built to respond to the needs of the population like legislators.

Criticizing members of the judiciary appointed by Republicans--who would give more powers to legislators and are not afraid to constrain Congress for the benefit of the states--as 'activist' rings hollow. There is simply no substance to those empty insults. Putting power back into the hands of citizens through elected officials could hardly be considered 'activist' or 'extra-constitutional' by any serious individual.

Democrats: if your ideas aren't good enough to pass through a legislature, why in the hell would we ever want them to be held by members of the judiciary?