5-4

I don't know about you, but 5-4 Supreme Court decisions on fundamental rights scare me to death.  We've twice come within one vote of losing our 2nd Amendment rights to keep and bear arms.  Why can't liberals read?

The Constitution is not that difficult to understand and the enumerated rights are pretty clear, and yet the Court's four liberals were unable to understand this simple language:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

And yet, with no apparently difficulty, liberals can find all kinds of rights that aren't even in the Constitution, such as a right to abortion or privacy, and certain liberals have already found a right to gay marriage.

Liberals believe in a "living" constitution, a document that bends and twists to whatever is politically and socially correct at the time.  In their world the rules by which our nation operates must change according to popular culture.  As Professor Walter Williams says, how would you like to play me in poker and have the rules be "living"?  Maybe you have three aces and I have seven-high junk.  In my "living" rules I might just decide that seven-high junk beats three aces and you're screwed.  That's pretty much how the liberals see the Constitution - make sure it works for those that politically correct society thinks are the "good guys" even it if means twisting the words into an unrecognizable mess.

Conservatives believe the Constitution means what it says and that the rules for our nation should not subject to the whims of pop culture. That's why we have so much trouble with the concept of finding rights that aren't in the document, and extending powers to the federal government that the Constitution says are reserved for the states.  Either the rules mean what they say or they mean nothing.

Let me take you back to Chief Justice John Roberts' confirmation hearing and something I posted at that time:

The Dems have this "little guy vs. big guy" thing in their minds where the little guy is always right and the big guy is always evil. John Roberts gave a brilliant answer to a question which summed up the role of the judiciary very nicely, and completely torched the Dems "the little guy should always win" view of justice. Here's what he said (h/t Rush Limbaugh):

ROBERTS: I had someone ask me in this process, I don't remember who it was, but somebody asked me, you know, "Are you going to be on the side of the little guy," and you obviously want to give an immediate answer, but as you reflect on it, if the Constitution says that the little guy should win, the little guy is going to win in court before me. But if the Constitution says that the big guy should win, well, then the big guy is going to win because my obligation is to the Constitution. That's the oath. The oath that a judge takes is not that I'll look out for particular interests; I'll be on the side of particular interests. The oath is to uphold the Constitution and laws of the United States, and that's what I would do.

That's exactly right.

With all this in mind, we better pray every day for the health of Justices Scalia, Alito, Roberts, Thomas and Kennedy and hope they can hold out until we get another Republican president.  If we lose any of those guys while Obama is in office the court will be swung destructively to the left and we could begin to lose any number of fundamental rights.

We should also vigorously oppose any liberal judicial appointments, including Elena Kagan whose confirmation hearings begin today.  Yes, she's a liberal-for-liberal swap, but if confirmed she'll be on the court a long time and we can't afford to confirm any more people who can't read and comprehend the simple language of the Constitution.  The Republicans should oppose her on principle and on the fact that her career contains no actual judicial experience and lots of political activism.  As far as I'm concerned, her banning of the ROTC program at Harvard should be enough to justify a filibuster.

When we have a Republican president again Democrats will not withhold any tool or tactic they have to stop our nominations.  We must be equally ruthless in our opposition to liberal appointments.  Nice guys end up with liberals on the court and fundamental rights destroyed.  We can't afford to be nice anymore.