"Thus a victorious army wins its victories before seeking battle;
an army destined to defeat fights in the hope of winning,"
-- Sun Tzu, Art of War, pg. 97
What James Fallows, former President Carter (D) speechwriter, blogged yesterday shows the lengths that some in the media will go to build a battle space. This was the original title: 5 Signs the United States is Undergoing a Coup.
Followed by this:
"1) First, a presidential election is decided by five people, who don't even try to explain their choice in normal legal terms.
"2) Then the beneficiary of that decision appoints the next two members of the court, who present themselves for consideration as restrained, humble figures who care only about law rather than ideology.
"3) Once on the bench, for life, those two actively second-guess and re-do existing law, to advance the interests of the party that appointed them.
"4) Meanwhile their party's representatives in the Senate abuse procedural rules to an extent never previously seen to block legislation -- and appointments, especially to the courts.
"5) And, when a major piece of legislation gets through, the party's majority on the Supreme Court prepares to negate it -- even though the details of the plan were originally Republican proposals and even though the party's presidential nominee endorsed these concepts only a few years ago.
When I was at American University, I was studying under Allan Lichtman for my senior history thesis. My thesis was about Ambassadorial Appointments during Watergate.
The question I posed, could two branches of Government work with each other even if they were at war with each other? To appoint Ambassadors (or Federal Judges), the executive chooses the name and the Senate votes on the candidate. First via Committee, then the whole Senate. Thus, there would have to be some cooperation between the Branches if things (such as appointing Ambassadors during the begining of a Second Term) fall apart between the Players, not the Institutions.
In Nixon's time, yes they could. The fact that I wrote it just before the Clinton Impeachment shows the power of my ability to get the pulse of what's next. And here's a dirty little secret about the Clinton Impeachment: The players played their roles, but no one Hated Clinton. Clinton did not hate the Congress -- they had to work together. (see paragraph above).
As a partisan, I know exactly when the breakdown occured with the Judicial system: When Borking was coined and Thomas was lynched.
Who attacked Bork and Thomas, thus destroying the Trust of the Third Branch was untoachable from Politics?
Repeat after me: Democrats.
And don't think we on the Right forgot how they were (and still) treated.
In politics, sometimes you win elections, and then sometimes you don't. What I have been seeing from the Left since December 2000, is that they cannot fathom ever losing.
It's why, when it comes to Filibusters, the process was fine against blocking President George W. Bush Judicial nominations but, now filibusters are horrible because they block the Obama Administration goals.
Partisans are also hacks, but I would respect the Democrats more if they understood any door they open to oppose the Right can be used by the Right. Or as I say simply: Don't like it? Don't start it.
The other problem with Democrats can also be summed up by Sun Tzu:
"If ignorant both of your enemy and yourself, you are certain in every battle to be in peril,"
-- Sun Tzu, Art of War, pg. 84
If SCOTUS becomes politicized, remember is was the Democrats who opened that door.
And wait, before Thursday, you will see the Liberal Talking Point "The Radical Roberts Court," Just watch.
My question: Why don't Democrats understand how Elections work and Law of Karma?
UPDATE 6/25/12 8:02 PM PST: Welcome back Instapundit Readers!