aTypical Joe: a gay New Yorker living in the rural South
Saturday, April 09, 2005
On an independent judiciary
A couple of nights ago, in comments on Nathan Newman’s Why is the Left Defending the Courts? post, I defended the courts. I said, in part:
My take is that bad as the courts have been and may yet be, they are better than populist hordes who think democracy means mob rule...I believe in the rule of law and I oppose violent action. It was violence that ruled in the South in the time of slavery, Jim Crow and lynching. And violence rules in lawless lands around the world with ineffective governments and corrupt malfunctioning or nonexistent judiciary systems.
The next day I found myself quoted ("Here is the liberal myth...") in Nathan’s Supreme Court: Mob Rule Central post. He explained:
What most progressives won’t accept is that the US courts, like the similar anti-populist Senate filibuster, have been the instigators of murder against blacks and have prevented the democratic majority from protecting their rights...Liberals need to get over their Warren Court nostalgia and face the reality that courts have no inherent value as checks on democratic power-- in fact, their track record is of far worse hostility to minority rights than the democratic branches of government.
The whole post has to be read, he makes a strong case.
Not just another gay Republican
Arthur J. Finkelstein, the political guru who helped engineer the defeat of one Democratic luminary, Mario M. Cuomo, has his sights set on another: Hillary Rodham Clinton.
His plan includes financing an advertising assault against her similar to the one orchestrated by Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, a group that attacked Senator John Kerry’s Vietnam service during the presidential election, according to the Republican officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity.
Nothing unusual so far. But then comes this:
Mr. Finkelstein’s personal life made headlines Saturday after he said he had married his longtime male partner in a civil ceremony in Massachusetts, a move that startled some of his associates, given his history with the Republican Party.
Begala on the liberal John Paul
I wouldn’t have called Pope John Paul liberal but I’m glad to see that Paul Begala did yesterday on Inside Politics:
BEGALA: The Holy Father is liberal. And in fact, when [CNN contributor] Carlos [Watson] was speaking [earlier in the program], I was in the green room. Underneath, some producer had written, “Many Catholic doctrines are conservative.” Absolutely correct. Many are liberal as well. The Holy Father bitterly opposed President Bush’s war in Iraq. He came to St. Louis—and I was there—and he begged America to give up the death penalty. President Bush strongly supports it, as did President Clinton and others. Many of the Holy Father’s views—my church’s views—are extraordinarily liberal. The Pope talked about savage, unbridled capitalism, not Bob Novak’s kind --
This after Wolf Blitzer opened the segment by suggesting that while “I’m sure Bob [Novak] is a good Catholic, I’m not so sure about Paul Begala.” A joke implying that liberals can’t be good Catholics?