January 16, 2006

This is a country of laws! Or so it is said. If that really was the case, judges would be rightly held in esteem. But what we have is a judiciary hell bent on changing society, in spite of what the law says and means. In order to understand the plight we live under, read carefully the Inherent Autonomy essay - Why Supreme Court Selections are a False Choice. Chief Justice John Marshall relegated individual States to second class municipalities, now Judge Samuel Alito will carry on the ignominious tradition that will elevate the Federal Government to even a higher dominance of legalized tyranny. The selection of Alito will satisfy most of America. Certainly the Democrats have resigned themselves to his ultimate confirmation. The Senate confirmation hearings are hardly the ideological battle blood sport some expected.

Don't be surprised, not only the egalitarian suffers from the misapprehension that activist judges serve the progressive evolution of society. The misguided conservatives that believe strict constructionist jurists are the solution to the boundless decay of the nation, also suffer from the delusion of judicial supremacy. Even Originalists that accept the distortion of Marbury v. Madison as the valid foundation of Supreme Court separation of powers suffer from the same affliction. All these judges have one overriding similarity. They are ALL government judges. Genuine traditionalists that remain suspect of the flaws in the U.S. Constitution understand that any judge that rules to superimpose a central government dictate over states' rights are by designation an illicit magistrate. The basic inevitable destruction of the spirit of the 1776 Revolution was accomplished in chambers and dictated in open court. Lovers of government share the same bed and seldom use prophylactics when they consummate their twitted union. They are all addicted to erotic dominant love using the missionary position - always on top.

The notion that keeping our nation whole and healthy by legal interpretations that represents the mainstream opinions of Americans is so nihilistic in its extreme that only a democrat (small d) would accept and advance systemic absurdity as normal human conduct. Courts do not make nations and rarely confer well-being. But what government tribunals excel in doing is fabricating elaborate layers of intentional chaos so that they can become official arbitrators for despotic order. So how is it feasible to express correct concern for public civil liberties, while relying on a suspect judiciary to interpret justice when Supreme Courts are ultimately designed to be superior of any executive king? Judges who serve the monarch are dangerous. No doubt Alito is a government judge. But when did the courts ever rule that the federal government is, by legalized configuration, an illegal and corrupt criminal organization?

The whiny Liberals never plead the case for legitimate secession, they only want to control the mechanisms of an all powerful nanny state. They just get heartburn when a corporate/state envoy is nominated to be an agent for the system. Their vision for social justice requires the forced implementation of State condoned theft to favor factions of their perverted community universe. The idea that independent and autonomous individuals have a natural birthright of sovereign self-determination is so dreadful to the mindset of that precious mainstream that the Supreme Court must be preserved as the decisive power of Solomon. Imperial absolutism need not always come from an emperor. When the union of government merges the sanctions of a Supreme Court with the actions of a Nero, the country burns.

Does that mean that an Alito confirmation needs to be defeated or that the Republic will be restored with jurists that bow to the will of the mob? What is the difference between the insanity that is inevitable from democratic voting and the arrogance from a regal bureaucratic regime headed by a global CEO reporting to an elite board of plutocrat directors? Now come the best argument yet! Alito is accused of being "outside the judicial mainstream and the mainstream of American opinion." Good God, at least HE can still be invoked . . . being outside the judicial mainstream is exactly the argument that wins the case for confirmation! The real problem is he is NOT enough of an Originalist to overturn Judge Marshall! The super-precedent making of Supreme Court supremacy is the first order of business to be overturned.

Appreciate why that will never happen in any court of law is the first step in understanding why the loony left and the wacky right are all part of the same sick political charade. Don't be conned; it's all legal, and business as usual.

James Hall aka SARTRE

Read the complete debate here.

Read all of SARTRE's articles here.

2006 Predictions and Realities