Dear Winston: the Supreme Court could suck even worse edition, and more

Dear Winston,

I know that most of the regulars at The Last Chance Democracy Cafe are hardcore Democrats.  But in light of the way the Democratic Congress caved on the Iraq funding bill, can you give me one good reason why I should ever support them again?


Furious in Fresno

*  *  *

Dear Furious,

Believe it or not, there actually are a lot of good reasons for liberals to continue voting Democratic, even if we sometimes have to hold our noses while we’re doing it.  But the one overriding reason, against which all others pale in comparison, is the future of The United States Supreme Court.

And, yes, I know how sick many liberals are of hearing what some call the “Supreme Court scare tactic” — the argument (the very one I’m making now) that we need to keep voting Democratic, despite the party’s shortcomings, because otherwise that awful bogeyman of an ultra-right wing Supreme Court will jump out of the closet at night and get us.  As Barbara Ehrenreich wrote in a column for The Nation back in August of 2000, titled Vote for Nader:

Ah, the Supreme Court! Never mind that pro-choice Justice O’Connor was a Reagan appointee or that Clinton’s man Breyer is one of the most economically conservative Justices around–the Supreme Court gets dragged out every four years to squash any attempt to escape the Democratic Party.

But, of course, Ehrenreich was dead wrong in most of her underlying assumptions in 2000, as she herself has since reluctantly admitted.  Sadly, the Big Bad Bush Wolf she downplayed the fear of turned out to be pretty damned big and bad after all.  And frighteningly, the Big Bad Supreme Court Wolf may very well turn out to be far worse over the long haul. 

Bush will disappear in shame into the mists of history soon (I won’t say he’ll disappear “soon enough” because tomorrow morning wouldn’t be soon enough, but he will be gone relatively soon); the extremist Supreme Court he’s leaving behind, on the other hand — a Court that will become even more extreme and long-lasting if the Republicans win the presidency and the Senate next election — may well be with us for another generation if not longer.

So here we sit, watching helplessly from the sidelines, as American law is being radically transformed into The Federalist Society’s wet dream: already during the Court’s current term, freedom of choice and the right to bring suit for discrimination have each taken significant hits.  Much worse will be coming later this year — count on it.

And this isn’t just about abortion, although freedom of choice is by itself a damn important issue, as my new friend Claire will gladly tell you.  The thing about abortion rights, however, is that even if Roe v. Wade were to disappear, God forbid, we would still be free to fight politically to maintain freedom of choice through legislation.  And in some parts of the country we would almost certainly win.  In fact, absent the security blanket provided by Roe, progressives would probably fight harder, gain more allies and win more often on abortion issues in the political arena. 

(One caveat: if a Republican president, elected in 2008, were able to appoint several more arch conservatives to the Supreme Court to replace some of the Court’s so-called liberals — something that could well happen — all bets on abortion would be off: such a radically conservative Court might actually go so far as to declare a fetus to be a person entitled to equal protection and due process under the Fourteenth Amendment, effectively outlawing all abortions nationwide, not to mention playing havoc with a multitude of medical issues surrounding pregnancy.)

But the greatest reason to fear the current very conservative Supreme Court — let alone the ultraconservative Court further right wing appointments would all but guarantee — is largely unrelated to hot ticket social issues like abortion and gay rights: no, the true potential catastrophe here is the likelihood the Court will interpret the constitution in ways that severely limit the power of the federal and state governments to pursue progressive goals like environmental protection, civil rights, worker rights, business regulation and much more (while at the same time whittling down individual liberties). 

Even before the Court’s recent surge to the right brought on by the appointment of Samuel Alito to replace Sandra Day O’Connor, the Rehnquist Court had almost certainly already become the most radical Supreme Court in the history of the nation, having declared more federal statutes unconstitutional than any Supreme Court preceding it.  One shudders to think what will happen now that Alito has joined the bench.  But the thought of having a new Republican president add two or three more Scalia/Thomas clones to the Court on top of Alito is absolutely terrifying.    

With a Supreme Court like that it may not matter all that much who ends up controlling the White House and Congress in the future, since their ability to pursue progressive reforms will be largely precluded by judicial decree.  To lose the Supreme Court to the far right indefinitely is to effectively lose the war for the nation’s political soul for at least a generation to come.  End of story.

So, should liberals jump ship from the Democrats out of a fit of anger over the Iraq vote (as opposed to continuing to fight to change it from within), notwithstanding all of the progress we’ve made in the last few years in getting the voice of the rank and file heard?  Not if we care about the future.



*  *  *
*  *  *

Dear Winston,

Why do you asshole Democrats always have to assume the very worst every time President Bush does anything?


Pissed Off in Peoria

*  *  *

Dear Pissed Off,

I guess it’s the same reason why back when I was a young man I always assumed the worst when a girlfriend said, “We need to talk.”  Only a complete bonehead fails to learn at least a little something from the failures of the past. 



*  *  *
*  *  *

Dear Winston,

What’s your take on the growing movement to make the rape of child a capital offense?  I’m generally not in favor of capital punishment, but I can’t even begin to think of anything more despicable than someone sexually molesting a small child.  I don’t like the fact that I feel this way, but I don’t know, maybe this is one situation where the ultimate penalty really can be justified.

Anyway, what do you think, Winston?


Anguished in Augusta

*  *  *

Dear Anguished,

To be honest with you, this scares the hell out of me.  In Coker v. Georgia (1977), the Supreme Court ruled that applying the death penalty to the rape of an adult was unconstitutional as cruel and unusual punishment.  But that was a very different Supreme Court than we have today.

My guess is that the present Supreme Court would uphold application of capital punishment to rape, especially when applied to crimes against children.  And when such a decision — one opening the floodgates to allowing executions for crimes other than murder — is some day announced, I suspect that much of the nation will let out a cheer of joy.  There is a bloodlust ablaze in the belly of American society that is an ugly thing to see.  And although recent polls tend to show some weakening in the public’s support for the death penalty, the vast majority of Americans continue to support it — and I have no doubt would in this situation. 

I’ve never hidden my opposition to capital punishment in all types of cases, but at least in the case of particularly heinous murders there is some objectively measurable element of proportionately: an eye for an eye, as the Good Book says — or at least as it says if one chooses to ignore the later sections that include the teachings of a man whose words dare not be spoken in this context, lest his pleas that we be merciful to one another be seen as not fitting well within the era’s dominant theology of vengeance.

Once we remove the requirement that the victim of a crime die as a condition to imposing death as a penalty, society surrenders even the pretext of proportionately, thereby entering the realm of pure revenge.  Not that this troubles the principal proponents of capital punishment, who increasingly don’t even bother trying to clothe their thirst for revenge as anything other than what it is: bloodlust pure and simple.

And, yes, raping a small child is an unspeakable crime, but then so is raping an elderly person, or someone who is mentally challenged.  What about major drug dealers, or someone who kidnaps a child for ransom, or a spy who steals national secrets, or a child pornographer?  And on and on we slide down the bloody trail.

Here’s something else: If you think we’ve seen a disturbing number of cases in which innocent people have been sent to death row — and if you don’t think that you’re either unforgivably uninformed or morally deficient — you ain’t seen nothing yet.  There is no class of crime that presents a greater risk of unjust convictions than child molestation cases.  Often such cases rise or fall on the testimony of young children, whose memories are often of very dubious reliability.

But what’s so sad is that in the view of many of the death penalty’s true believers none of this matters.  Their desire for bloody revenge is so powerful that if to satisfy it requires that a few innocents must die, well then so be it.

I don’t know about you, Anguished in Augusta, but that’s not the sort of America I want to live in.



*  *  *

Check out the last edition of Dear Winston here.

Check out the episodes archive here.

l441 xanax

Mobile phones send and receive radio signals with any number of cell site base stations fitted with microwave antennas.

ordering xanax online

[36] The non-thermal effects of RF radiation are ordering xanax online of active study.

does work snorting xanax better

In April 2005, the law firm of Callahan, McCune and Willis filed does work snorting xanax better action lawsuit against Jamster! on behalf of a San Diego father and his ten-year-old daughter.

causing xanax hiccups

Due to their low establishment costs and rapid deployment, causing xanax hiccups networks have since spread rapidly throughout causing xanax hiccups outstripping the growth of fixed telephony.

buy overnight pharmacy xanax

WIth the proper equipment, it’s possible to intercept the re-connect signal and encode the data it contains into buy overnight pharmacy xanax phone — in all respects, the ‘blank’ is then an exact duplicate of the real phone and any calls made on the ‘clone’ will be charged to the original account.

peach xanax

[citation needed] However, in peach xanax commercial airlines have prevented the use of cell phones and laptops, due to the fact that the frequencies emitted from these devices may disturb the radio waves contact of the airplane.

xanax to is simular lexapro

com, ReCellular, and MyGreenElectronics offer to buy back and recycle xanax to is simular lexapro s from users.

ambien xanax and

Older telephones simply used ambien xanax and of bells for the ringer.

online xanax prescription

Around 80% of online xanax prescription population enjoys online xanax prescription coverage as of 2006.

xanax tablets pictures of


personal asda loans

Mobile phones generally obtain power from batteries which can be recharged from mains power, personal asda loans port or a cigarette lighter socket in a car.

originator loan

In 1984, Bell Labs developed modern commercial cellular technology (based, to originator loan extent, on the Gladden, Parelman Patent), which employed multiple, centrally-controlled base stations (cell sites), each providing service to a small area (a cell).

loan jobs processor

The European market adopted loan jobs processor Party Pays” model throughout the GSM environment and soon various other GSM markets also started to emulate this model.

rn loan nyc forgiveness

This resulted in rn loan nyc forgiveness of charging callers for outbound calls and also for receiving calls.

farmington home loans

[2] These manufacturers account for over 80% of all farmington home loans s sold and produce phones for sale in most countries.

loans equity home nevada

At the same time, the radio access network may evolve from loans equity home nevada architecture to a distributed one.

student loan alberta

In student loan alberta however many users tend to ignore this as it is rarely enforced, especially if the other carriages are crowded and they have no choice but to go in the “quiet carriage”.

calculate amount a repayment loan

The use of calculate amount a repayment loan s by people who are driving has become increasingly common, either as part of their job, as in the case of delivery drivers who are calling calculate amount a repayment loan or by commuters who are chatting with a friend.

processor loan salary

* SMAF: Yamaha music format that combines MIDI with instrument sound data (aka Module files).

express loans sba

Mobile phones generally obtain power from batteries which can be recharged from mains power, express loans sba port or a cigarette lighter socket in a car.

10 Responses to “Dear Winston: the Supreme Court could suck even worse edition, and more”

  1. agnostic Says:

    At what age will the states cut off the death penalty? 12? 14? 15? What if a black male sleeps with his 15 yr old white girlfriend? Does that make him a sexual predator for life? Does that subject him to the death penalty? especially in the south? WHERE are the voices of outrage over this movement?

  2. FreeDem Says:

    I wonder if they would be so quick to call for the death penalty, when so many of their own are at stake, or if they really are so compartmentalized that they don’t realize that. Would Mark Foley have gotten out and campaigned for his own death penalty?

    Gang Of Pirates member and Iraq war profiteer (redundancy?) William Irey, stands accused of S&M on toddlers but like Mark Foley is in a fancy mental health rehab clinic like kicking toddlers (or not doing so), can be a twelve step program like kicking booze. In any case it will not be the Foleys, or the Ireys, of the world who would ever see a gas chamber. They may net even see a real prison.

    The scary part was the man who was accused of shooting pictures of naked children and “cutting their heads off”. When the actual story was told it tuned out one of the children had taken the camera and all had been swimming, and that since the camera had been inexpertly aimed, the heads were not in the picture, but had not damaged the children.

    There are many such tales and it would be very hard to apologize to dead people particularly when those with power will not face such problems.

    One need only see this
    Republican values create child molesters and my own comments here
    FreeDemocrat’s Freedom blog: The Generation of Monsters to see a place for real solutions.

  3. Political Waves » The Alito Effect Says:

    [...] Dear Winston: the Supreme Court could suck even worse edition, and more by Steve, The Last Chance Democracy Cafe Wednesday, May 30th, 2007 [...]

  4. Larkrise Says:

    All we can hope is that those Justices who are thinking of retiring will hold on until Bush is gone. Scalia is a disgrace to the court. So is Thomas. Alito will be more of the same. Roberts has shown his true colors. These men are going to politicize the Court even more than its unethical partisan ruling on the 2000 election. This is a disaster for the country in the long run. Can Justices be impeached? Scalia lacks any integrity or ethics. He has sullied the Court on numerous occasions. I think he should be booted.

  5. RJHall Says:

    “So, should liberals jump ship from the Democrats out of a fit of anger over the Iraq vote”

    Gee, I sure hope Winston wasn’t making a slam against Cindy Sheehan, whose letter “Why I Am Leaving the Democratic Party” was for some reason not posted on Buzzflash. (I wonder why not? If I hadn’t searched the web for it after Sheehan obliquely mentioned it in her later letter “Good Riddance Attention Whore”, which WAS posted on Buzzflash, I would never have read it! Here’s an address of where it was posted: )

  6. Again Says:

    To lose the Supreme Court to the far right indefinitely is to effectively lose the war for the nation’s political soul for at least a generation to come.

    the problem (seems to me) is the lifetime seat - what’s the idea behind? The best man is always the best man? People learn all the time - so the man, who is on day (1) the best informed and wise man (requirement for a good judge) can easily “lose ranking” when another person learns more to become the best informed and wise person on day (2) - so why lifetime seats?

  7. Chuck Says:

    The Supreme Court may be inconsequential, I refer back to NATIONAL SECURITY PRESIDENTIAL DIRECTIVE/NSPD 51 & HOMELAND SECURITY DIRECTIVE/HSPD-20, that I mentioned in an earlier rant of May 21st.

    Supreme Court? King George says he doesn’t have to concern himself with it. Guess who decides what constitutes an emergency! Look at this document! Read the Definitions; (2), (e), and see what the word “comity” means.

    And God damn it Steve, don’t take this part out. (O.K. I guess you can,) but I think we might need another rebellion like like the original one. I would hope that there are enough Military personnel willing to over-throw this dictatorship under our own King George that military might would not be a consideration.

  8. PK Says:

    Don’t be too hard on the Democrats for “caving in” on the war. Remember that in the senate they have the majority by only one person, and that person is Joe Lieberman, and he supports the war. If he decides to call himself a Republican, then the Republicans gain control of the senate.

  9. Finster Says:


    You need to get a grip. The Supreme Court today is not “very conservative”. It is more centralized. That’s what it’s supposed to be. This fear liberals have of Roe vs. Wade being overturned is laughable. So what if it is??? I am far from a Jesus Freak, or a Bible Thumping Idiot. By the way, I like how many compassionate people of the left preach tolerance and understanding, but somehow manage to find horrible and vicious names for their opponents. Very classy indeed. Anyway, I’m pro-choice myself. A woman chooses to start seeing a guy. She chooses to get intimate with him on a deeper level. Then, she chooses to go all the way. Then, she chooses to remove her clothes. Then, she chooses to engage in sex without any protection. She chooses to do so, even though she has been told it could result in an unwanted pregnency. That’s a lot of choices I count. I’m not from the bible belt. I do not think people will burn in hell if they do not follow a religion. You know why Roe vs. Wade stinks? Because it has created a whole bunch of people in the past couple of generations, men and women, who are a bunch of self-centered bums and jerk offs, with absolutely no regard for anybody but themselves. The whole thought that somebody would suck their own down a sink, because it’s inconvenient for them and cramps their style, makes me want to vomit. It’s all about me me me entitlement. Girls (and guys) today want their “rights”. Years ago, when people made an oops, well gosh…they were actually expected to do the right thing and started raising the family they created. It was called personal responsibility (not Fascism, contrary to liberal beliefs). If not the personal responsibility route…there was something called adoption (last time I checked, it’s still available as an option). Well looky here!! Yet another choice. Oh wait…that’s right. I can’t bear the thought of giving the child up, not knowing what happens, I’d rather kill it than be in suspense my whole life. After all, it’s all about MY feelings and MY rights. And then there’s the stretch marks, after all I want MY body to look good. And now I can go off to college like nothing ever happened!! Yay!!! God Bless the liberal Supreme Court!
    And you’re afraid of George Bush (who previously I was told couldn’t eat with a fork) and the Supreme Court he’s helped to create??? Frankly, I’m more afraid of befriending the guy who would “privately” ask his girlfriend have an abortion. If he’s willing to get rid of his own kid, he sure as hell ain’t gonna do much for me in a life or death bind.

  10. CCone Says:

    I can’t believe you say we should hold our noses and vote for someone. Someone who is a sell out because there are alot on the Democratic side as well as on the Republican. My father won’t fix a speeding ticket for the founder of State Farm. My father was the last full working Mayor in Bloomington, IL. George Mecherle told my father, this is in the late 40s, that it wasn’t often you meet an honest politician, and he was right. My father kept the Mob from bringing gambling into Bloomington, and therefore, they fought against his run for the Senate, and he didn’t win.

    Do not sell out, hold your nose and vote. Be courageous and find the honest man and/or woman. Hilliary isn’t. The waffler goes where the flow she feels is strongest to carry her forward, not this country. We have accepted far too little, far too long.

    I hate when I hear the term, “Unelectable”. If that isn’t media control, I don’t know what is. If you put an idea into people, it can become reality. It works both ways. Believe that any person may be empowered by the people, that we the people have a mandate from our founders to stand up and demand our government learn that they are the servants, and we are the masters. That only by us and on our backs, may a government continue. We must control our government, and change it to what our founding fathers had envisioned. Never hold your nose. Vote with courage and determination. Let us win our Republic back!

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.