Here’s your hat.
What’s your hurry?
The words “Souter is retiring” were probably still echoing in the room when the pundits, analysts and experts who make their living telling us what we think started the name game regarding a replacement.
First of all, let’s give some props, shall we?
Thank you, Justice David Souter, for your years of service to the United States of America. Regardless of your “blue state/red state” affiliation or the tone of your personal legal theology, no one can deny that you have done yourself and your country honor by selflessly serving on the Supreme Court since your appointment in 1990.
Speaking of theology, by the way, nice job on proving your detractors wrong.
Ted Kennedy and John Kerry, among others, voted against your confirmation, fearful that you were a conservative cut from the cloth that would have made Barry Goldwater seem like Michael Phelps in a head shop.
When the bio is written, it will show that while you are, and have always been, more “conservative” than “liberal”, you ultimately ended your tenure on the bench in a posture that more often leaned to the left than to the right.
So, I imagine the loudest sound heard when your retirement was announced was the hysterical clapping and cheering coming from Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter.
I can hear them chanting now.
“Get thee behind us, Souter”
And if you don’t think that somewhere, right now, an effort is underway to try and get Sarah Palin’s name on the short list, you simply don’t know how this game is played.
Not that there’s anything wrong with that.
Most of us don’t know how the game is played.
That’s probably because most of us don’t really care.
Most of us (“most of us” being defined as those whose concerns about political maneuvering and strategizing tend to be trumped by worrying about how to pay our mortgages and feed our kids) wouldn’t know how to begin to choose someone to serve as an associate justice on the Supreme Court of the United States of America.
Because the process of choice is so complex and multi-layered that, if printed on paper, would very likely look like those DVD Player Instruction Manuals that come in three languages and make no damn sense to anybody.
Then again…
I’ve been thinking a little about this.
Imagine that.
The definition of insanity, it is said, is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result each time.
So, how about this time we take a totally unexpected turn off the well-traveled road of the selection process?
And, yes, I realize the first argument will be about whether to turn to the left or the right.
Hardy-har.
Everybody’s a comedian.
Seriously, let me run this up your flagpole and see if you feel like saluting it.
How about we dispense with the usual, predictable “qualifications” like legal experience, put aside the need to find someone who will balance the racial, sexual, spiritual and gender makeup of the court, give no thought to placating either the Kennedy/Kerry kids or the Limbaugh/Coulter crew and look for someone who…
…would rule in favor of paying teachers, police officers, fire fighters, et al, six figures while assuring our favorite movie stars they can most assuredly get by on one, and not ten, million per picture…
…would sleep like a baby after locking up greedy CEO’s and throwing away the key…
…believes that torture as a means of acquiring information is, at best, bad public relations, at worst, bad karma…
…believes that abortion is like trying to change the way that rivers flow…an attempt to reverse the plan that God has, no matter how zany we might think that plan is…
…believes that it’s okay to think that God’s plan is zany….
…believes that 55 MPH can mean 60MPH…but not 80MPH…
…would reverse the decision to take prayer out of school because it wasn’t ours to take out of schools in the first place…hey…as long as your praying doesn’t keep anybody awake in study hall, whatever, you know?
…believes that you have an unquestionable right to make a fist and swing your arm…and that right ends where another’s nose begins…
…believes that “fairness” is a much underrated and underused concept…
…believes that the spirit of the law should always pre-empt the letter of the law…
…believes that Kara really was picked to replace Paula but don’t count Paula out just yet…
…believes that the term “pro-life” is redundant…
…believes that ignorance is a misdemeanor, but stupid is a felony…
…agrees that the death penalty is stepping over the “vengeance is mine” line…but totally gets that the parents of the raped and murdered child don’t give a shit about lines…
…believes that common sense really would resolve 99% of the issues brought before the bench..but…
…understands that common sense is no longer common, nor sensical…
…believes that banning gay marriage is stepping over the “judge not” line…but totally gets the two frankfurters in the same bun gag in “Blades of Glory”…
…believes that Yoko really did break up The Beatles…but that it was an accident…
…thinks that we have one, no, wait, two too many “judge” shows on in the afternoons now…
…believes that Simon is really the only one of the four telling contestants the truth…
…believes that you can’t censor one thing without censoring every thing…
…is willing to support a constitutional amendment banning any further paternity testing done by the staff of the Maury Povich show…
…believes that the idea of doing unto others as you would have others do unto you is pretty much a one line summation of every legal text ever written…
As I finished up the list, I realized two things.
First, the whole idea aint really all that crazy.
Second, I think I know who would be perfect for the job.
Me.
No comments:
Post a Comment