Monday, August 06, 2012

Quotable: Sandra Day O'Connor, History's SCOTUS Villain

SHE CAST THE DECIDING VOTE ON Bush v. Gore, yet remains to this day in DEEP DENIAL. Can you blame her? Former Supreme Court Justice O'Connor will forever be defined as one of the great villains of American jurisprudence, the so-called "swing vote" who cast the deciding vote AGAINST the Democratic process and IN FAVOR of her POLITICAL BIAS.

It's as simple as that. The die was cast for a Supreme Court Latin American-style extra-constitutional PUTSCH the moment O'Connor was overheard badmouthing Gore, saying she counldn't "stand the idea of that man" as president:
But to the liberal clerks it was all over. The brother of a Ginsburg clerk, who covered legal affairs for The Wall Street Journal, had learned that the paper would soon report how, at a party on Election Night, O'Connor was overheard expressing her dismay over Gore's apparent victory. Once that information became public, the liberal clerks felt, O'Connor would have to step aside. When, on the night before the Court convened, she sent out a sealed memo to each of her colleagues, those clerks hoped this had actually come to pass. In fact, she was merely stating that she, too, felt the Florida Supreme Court had improperly usurped the state legislature's power.
Was O'Connor asked during her CBS interview about this particular episode which goes directly to personal bias and, when made public, should have prompted her recusal? It's a rhetorical question; the MSM/Beltway Media really think we're this STUPID and forgetful. OF COURSE THE QUESTION WASN'T ASKED. Instead, O'Connor kept denying her responsibility — "I don't see how you can say anybody was the deciding vote. They all counted." — claiming she has no regrets (DENIAL is a strong defense mechanism for the knowingly guilty of malfeasance and malpractice of the highest order): "No, I mean it was a tough deal; i[t] was a closely fought election; and it's no fun to be part of a group of decision makers that has to decide which side the ball is going to fall on."

Let's set the record straight on Sandra Day O'Connor's craven and unethical conduct: This was NOT about deciding for candidate A over candidate B. THIS WAS ABOUT ORDERING THE END — BY JUDICIAL FIAT — OF A LEGALLY ESTABLISHED STATE DEMOCRATIC PROCESS FOR DECIDING CLOSE ELECTIONS WITH A RECOUNT, AFFIRMED BY THE STATE'S HIGHEST COURT.


No comments: