Gingrich’s anti-judicial tirade is an attack on liberty
As historian Newt Gingrich sees it, the American people are suffering “a fundamental assault on our liberties by the courts.” Unless we fight back against this “grotesquely dictatorial” judiciary, our nation is destined to slide toward “a secular, European sort of bureaucratic socialist society.”
More specifically, Gingrich argues that the liberal Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has proved itself to be “anti-American” and thus has forfeited its right to exist. Congress, he says, should simply pass a law to abolish the court altogether, false concerns about “separation of power” be damned.
Gingrich also proposes to haul a series of federal judges before Congress where they can be forced to defend unpopular decisions. As he explained in an appearance on “Face the Nation” Sunday, he would even empower federal marshals to arrest any judges who refused to heed congressional demands for testimony.
According to Gingrich, such steps would have been applauded by our founding fathers, who feared from the beginning that unelected judges would become a tyrannical ruling class. He and his aides lay out that theory, complete with its alleged historical underpinnings, in “Bringing the Courts Back Under the Constitution,” a 28-page white paper available at the Gingrich campaign website.
Those who take the time to read the paper will find that it is less the work of Newt’s inner historian than of Newt’s inner fascist. It represents a profound distortion of our nation’s history, the writings of our Founding Fathers and the basic core of the American philosophy of government. It is dishonest history.
Consider, for example, Gingrich’s underhanded, deceptive attempt to draft Alexander Hamilton as an supporter of his anti-judicial crusade. Using selected quotes from the Federalist Papers, Hamilton is depicted by Gingrich as a supporter of efforts to use the legislative and executive branches to rein in a tyrannical, overbearing judiciary.
That is a 180-degree reversal of Hamilton’s actual position. He saw the courts as vulnerable guarantors of freedom whose independence must be preserved at all costs against the likes of Gingrich.
In Federalist Papers #78, for example, Hamilton writes that the judiciary “is beyond comparison the weakest of the three departments of power; that it can never attack with success either of the other two; and that all possible care is requisite to enable it to defend itself against their attacks.”
In other words, while Gingrich proposes to undermine judicial independence, Hamilton warns us to take “all possible care” to ensure that the judiciary is protected against such attacks.
The debate between Gingrich and Hamilton goes on and on.
Here’s Gingrich:
“A judicial branch that is largely unaccountable and not subject to meaningful checks and balances can — and does — routinely issue constitutional rulings that threaten individual liberties, compromise national security, undermine American culture, and ignore the consent of the governed.”
Here’s Hamilton:
“The complete independence of the courts of justice is peculiarly essential in a limited Constitution…. Limitations of this kind can be preserved in practice no other way than through the medium of courts of justice, whose duty it must be to declare all acts contrary to the manifest tenor of the Constitution void.”
Gingrich denies that “the Constitution empowered the Supreme Court with final decision-making authority about the meaning of the Constitution.” Hamilton, in the excerpt cited above, explicitly says otherwise.
Gingrich proposes that judges must be kept in fear of their jobs through such steps as impeachment and the abolition of courts that offend public opinion. Hamilton warns that “from the natural feebleness of the judiciary, it is in continual jeopardy of being overpowered, awed, or influenced by its co-ordinate branches; and that as nothing can contribute so much to its firmness and independence as permanency in office, this quality may therefore be justly regarded as an indispensable ingredient in its constitution, and, in a great measure, as the citadel of the public justice and the public security.”
But here’s the crux of the issue. It is a commonplace within the conservative movement to point out that “we are not a democracy, we are a republic.” In plain terms, the saying makes no sense; a republic is a type of democracy, just as an orange is a type of fruit.
That said, the phrase does attempt to express a larger and fundamental truth. We are not a democracy in its purest form, in which the majority can outvote the minority on every issue without regard to individual freedom. We exist under a limited government, a government of laws not of men, where the power of the majority is constrained. “A republic, not a democracy” is intended as an endorsement of that principle.
As we’ve seen, however, the majority does not like to feel itself constrained. It gets frustrated when it is told that on matters of fundamental importance, such as religion and free speech, the viewpoint of the majority does not matter because, well, we’re a republic not a democracy and certain things are off limits to the majority. And it is usually the courts that have to deliver that unwelcome message to the majority.
As Hamilton wrote:
“Considerate men of every description ought to prize whatever will tend to beget or fortify that temper in the courts: as no man can be sure that he may not be tomorrow the victim of a spirit of injustice, by which he may be a gainer today. And every man must now feel, that the inevitable tendency of such a spirit is to sap the foundations of public and private confidence, and to introduce in its stead universal distrust and distress.”
That final sentence — ” … the inevitable tendency of such a spirit is to sap the foundations of public and private confidence, and to introduce in its stead universal distrust and distress” — seems directed across the centuries right at Gingrich.
– Jay Bookman
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
927 comments Add your comment
md
December 19th, 2011
10:53 pm
I think Newt has a point……the nine lawyers on the SC and the various other courts, tend to dictate what the other several hundred lawyers in Congress/WH can and can’t do……..not too sure that is how it is supposed to work.
Boils down to who’s definition gets used……how else can a SC divided along ideologic lines be explained.
Thulsa Doom
December 19th, 2011
10:56 pm
Not a Neal Boortz Redneck
December 19th, 2011
10:46 pm
Thulsa – he didn’t say “fourth best”.
I know. And I did not say that Obama himself stated that his administration was “4th best”. This is what I said- “This man is delusional *if he thinks* his administration is the 4th most successful of all time”
Jm
December 19th, 2011
10:58 pm
MD
Newts only point is self promotion
The 9th sucks but there are reasonable solutions
Like not appointing idiots
Thulsa Doom
December 19th, 2011
10:59 pm
Jm,
I don’t like commies. Wouldn’t be surprised though if many a fool on here did.
Wonk or Wank?
December 19th, 2011
11:00 pm
Jay’s point today is about the checks and balances of our government. Our founding fathers were looking at history when they deduced the remedy to tyranny. THey decided upon 3 branches of government: judiciary, legislative and executive. They realized that human nature itself was the enemy. The understood that they themselves were the enemy. How do you legislate against yourself????
Thought I’d get the thread back on track and away from the “group of trolls”. The “pride of trolls”? The “gaggle of trolls”? No, that doesn’t quite describe them does it? No. NO!! There is an expression that I have coined that totally describes the “Liverpool of dung-beetles” that have infested this once-clean blog: the self-salving annointees who infect this blog can only be described as a “bookman of sphincters”.
Kaching.
Jm
December 19th, 2011
11:01 pm
Doom
4th most disastrous
Thulsa Doom
December 19th, 2011
11:02 pm
Jm,
Only 4th most disastrous? You sure you don’t want to revise another statement there?
Jm
December 19th, 2011
11:03 pm
“How do you legislate against yourself????”
Congress can repeal laws at any time silly
Soothsayer
December 19th, 2011
11:05 pm
Only on the advice of Old Timer do you get a bye from me.
Timus
December 19th, 2011
11:05 pm
The more Newt speaks the less people like him. I’m not surprised. Newt is the opposite of Romney. If Romney changed then Newt is predictably the same. He has a good idea and then you’re like awesome!! And then he follows it up with saying something like as president he’d arrest judges who essentially don’t agree with him and then that’s when you hear crickets!! lol!! I love it. I’m gonna hate to see him fall out of the lead.
Jm
December 19th, 2011
11:06 pm
Doom
FDR, Nixon, and a few others were pretty, I mean really, bad
Post ww2, he ties with Nixon
Jm
December 19th, 2011
11:08 pm
And Carter (nice man)
Soothsayer
December 19th, 2011
11:08 pm
When you think about it, it all makes sense, really. How could anyone be more important than Newt?
Jm
December 19th, 2011
11:12 pm
Amphibians are very self absorbed
Thulsa Doom
December 19th, 2011
11:13 pm
Jm,
Nixon did one really dumb, underhanded thing in an effort to win the election. And I would submit that part of the reason he went to such lengths(watergate) is the simple fact that he had the 1960 presidential election stolen from him by union and mob thugs in Chicago. From what I’ve read many historians concede that there was rampant fraud in Chicago at the behest of the mob. Not justifying Nixon or anything. Just sayin the man got screwed once and said to himself he would be damned if he was going to let it happen again.
And he did have some bright spots. He created the EPA at a time when we really needed to clean things up, I think there was landmark environmental legislation aimed at cleaning up the water and air on top of the creation of the EPA,and he opened up China which was huge. And I think there were one or 2 other nice accomplishments. He, like Jimmy Carter, gets a much worser rap then he deserves.
Jm
December 19th, 2011
11:13 pm
Lights out
Soothsayer
December 19th, 2011
11:14 pm
You know, when you think about it, it’s really hard to be a Republican, Tea Party, Conservative these days.
When you shine the light of day on the “belief system,” the inescapable lunacy is right there for the whole World to discern.
What I think would benefit the Right are “focus groups” on whom they could test their idiotic “truisms” for ridiculousness before they are actually released on the general populace.
Ya think?
Thulsa Doom
December 19th, 2011
11:15 pm
Now FDR I will agree that he was probably the worst because he is the one that ushered in the beginning of the welfare state and the era of big govt.
Thulsa Doom
December 19th, 2011
11:18 pm
“What I think would benefit the Right are “focus groups” on whom they could test their idiotic “truisms” for ridiculousness before they are actually released on the general populace.”
Sooth,
Focus groups? The repubs along with the Dems have been using focus groups for quite a while now.
Not a Neal Boortz Redneck
December 19th, 2011
11:21 pm
I’m reminded of that idiot Glenn Beck ripping on Wilson and TR – two truly great presidents as noted by all experts on the office.
But Beck lives in an alternative universe with no basis in reality.
Wonk or Wank?
December 19th, 2011
11:30 pm
I am humbled. You mention me in the same breath you mention Newt? Really? I’m that important? I will let the reader decide.
If the thousands of readers of Jay’s column don’t agree with this then let them scream it out. Let them shout me down. But I will not defer to anyone about my ability to advance the discussion. I can’t stand chat rooms. I hate them with a passion. (”howRu?” “good” “I’m good too” “good” “good” “nice to hear you’re good” “good to hear you’re nice” “good” “good”.)
THATS ALL YOU GET FROM THESE SNIVELING SNOBS, PEOPLE. Cyberspace has compiled complete volumnes covering decades of Bookman’s troll-droppings that say no more than “good” “good” “nice” “nice’
. Fact. Jack.
ANd it makes. me. sick.
People are suffering, and these insufferable snobs have the nerve to present nice-sounding bromides over tough solutions that may achieve justice. Look folks, we have to re-examine capitalism itself. We need the constitution, but only as a rudder. The winds and the seas are ours to navigate anew….by ourselves, for ourselves, and of ourselves. (I just wrote that).
So when I see that Jay Bookman’s blog has been turned into a farce, well, I’m sorry, but I have to object.
It’s that simple.
Jack
December 19th, 2011
11:36 pm
So interesting that the narrow mind uses history (and the Bible for that matter) for validation rather than enlightenment.
md
December 19th, 2011
11:40 pm
Jm, I think you missed the point…….the courts seem to be trending more toward ideology than interpreting the law as written…….or can you explain why so many outcomes are divided strictly along ideologic lines? They are all looking at the same laws…..same cases……yet different interpretations based on what?
Ideology. And that ideology is stronger than anything coming out of Congress or the WH…….who’s doing the dictating? Sure isn’t the other 2 branches of gov’t…..they are the ones getting a thumbs up or thumbs down…….not the other way around.
Woody
December 19th, 2011
11:42 pm
He got the headline didn’t he? That’s all that counts when your polls are slipping. And, uh, Jay, you are playing into his media strategy.
Wonk or Wank?
December 19th, 2011
11:45 pm
We may be too late. If Goldman Sachs can destroy us. If Citbank is loose cannon. If our trust is stripped away from the American Dream, which itself iis devolving into a blind series of plan B’s that mostly culminate into a fatal destiny that only deluded and self-fulfilling entrepreneurs can achieve, (hey, we only get old, fall behind on our taxes and then die, fools), then we cannot support this historical presumption that a man will get out of bed in the morning only if he can make money by his own cunning. We have to respect the presence of the 7 billion other entrepreneurs on this planet.
We have to accept that we are self-indulgent and overly-sensitive morons, and that a greater collective is at work here, and that we must provide for the least of us all, and in doing so, we will find that path that will support the masses and ensure peace.
If not, we’re finished.
ld
December 19th, 2011
11:47 pm
Wonk or Wank
maybe: murder of crow ing opinionaters’ or ‘murder of blabbers’?
I’d like to see a law requiring all public officials over a certain age be required to take a sanity/senility test–
–that could have ended Reagan’s second term early before his memory of Iran Contra disappeared.
I would not be opposed to term limits for the Supreme Court but also would want them for members of Congress–this probably should have been done when term limit was set for President — oh, wait, Congress exempts itself from the laws it requires others to obey, like ‘insider trading’, so ain’t gonna happen.
ld
December 19th, 2011
11:53 pm
The GOP and Dems have put in place rules to minimize the possibility that a third-party candidate would be a viable challenger. I suspect that if they have not already done so, they would put in place impediments to getting any constitutional amendment or “proposition” on ballots if it either limited their power or forced members of Congress to be accountable.
md
December 19th, 2011
11:54 pm
“and that we must provide for the least of us all, and in doing so, we will find that path that will support the masses and ensure peace. ”
And without defining what constitutes the “least of us all”, a society will be overrun by it’s least common denominator as the “least” know how to play the game too………..
Cant’s are much different than wont’s………
Wonk or Wank?
December 20th, 2011
12:02 am
Great point, ID!!!! King George was maybe insane during our Revolution of 1776. The founding fathers certainly were aware of the disaster that could occur to a country if the leader was insane, right?
The triumvirate. The three cornered hat. 3. It was all the signers of the Declaration could come up with. So far so good, I guess.
We’re corrupt by our very nature. WE ARE! (and don’t we love it) I will try to support my family at the expense of yours, but, I can’t kill you because we have a legislative, and a executive, and a judicial form of goverment that has evolved to make the consequences of my willfull execution to be phyrric.
We have to remember that only a few generations, (our great grandparent’s great grandparents), have passed since we could achieve wealth by brokering slavery, and any one of us could have done it. Don’t be fooled by the compassionate conservatives. They are the vestiges of the slave trade and all the erudition that formed that laws that protected the rights of slaveowners.
Dont be a fool.
Wonk or Wank?
December 20th, 2011
12:11 am
Good parry, Md. But the least of us is all of us. The most of us is but a few.
The least of us. The homeless? The sick? The old. The young children orphans. The Injuns who inherited the consequences of our totally-justified Manifest Destiny The Blacks who inherited the consequences of our interpretation of Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation?
The least of us is by us, and of us, and for us. (I just wrote that. I actually had a far superior phrase, but I was embarrassed to confront lincoln and deleted it and I can’t remember it. Dammit.)
Wonk or Wank?
December 20th, 2011
12:13 am
You have to admit that the conservatives have been consistently-compassionate, dont U?
Wonk or Wank?
December 20th, 2011
12:17 am
The Least of us is the most of us, but the Most of us is only a few of us.
Wonk or Wank?
December 20th, 2011
12:26 am
Capitalism is not inherent in a Democratic Republic. That’s the point that Jay missed but only by an inch. The entire idea of a set of independent people must include a provision for outside intersecting sets. We are math. Sets and subsets and intersecting sets are a fatal reality of existence. We comingle. We bump into each other, and if we don’t like what we encounter, then we destroy, and then we get the 100 years war, (that we’re supposed to believe is over). when we invest in the face of the Euro Crisis. Sure, Germany, that peaceful loving land of philanthropists, is supposed to absorb the debt of the historically-despised REST OF EUROPE.
sure.
We have to rethink capitalism and the idea of a free market now, before the other shoe drops OVER THERE.
It going to be painful, folks.
Very painful.
Fast and Furious Spending
December 20th, 2011
1:05 am
From Keep Up the Good Fight:
Corrected:
Bookman is proving once again that he is not even a good historian and the stupidity of the party base that supports this kind of blowhard is just insulting to American principles.
I became a Gingrich financial supporter just a few minutes ago based upon the words and actions recently of Newt Gingrich.
Jay,
Don’t do these long essays. You just aren’t very skilled, articulate or comprehensive. A good high-school debater would have you eliminated in the first round, were you not already in your ivory media tower.
The truth about the coequal branches of government is that each has asserted its influence over the decades. The Presidency in the era of Lincoln, Hamilton, FDR; Congress in the seventies and eighties; the judciary recently. In fact, if Marbury vs. Madison (judicial review) were so essential to the country’s existence, why not grant SCOTUS the ability in the constitution?
Furthermore, SCOTUS has gotten many things very very wrong that the population or one of the other branches of government had to overturn. SCOTUS said that Dred Scott wasn’t a person. Remember that Bookman? It has done other things too like setting copyright law, abortion law of the land, and recently other policies that it has no business doing.
No Jay, the Supreme Court was not designed to be an absolute oligarchy that dictates to the other branches of government what is and what shall be. It’s time the rest of government put it in its proper place. Your idea that 5 of 9 certain people are responsible for upholding liberty is so wrong, absurd and ill-thought that were you not so seemingly serious about your crazy conclusion, I’d be laughing right now.
Of all the branches of government, the court was designed in part to protect the legal rights of the minority against abuses by the majority. What it has become in the Ninth Circuit is a defender not of existing laws, but of legalisms and very real and insane modifications and cancelations of the real public will. You’re right that we’re not a true Democracy–thank goodness for that. But we’re also not a technocratic bureaucracy like the EU, or an oligarchy like Iran, where in both places unelected officials slowly drain away choice and freedom from citizens.
Jay,
Stick with the ephemeral nonsense–gotcha political games you play. You’re much much more effective at those types of polemics.
Wonk or Wank?
December 20th, 2011
1:16 am
So I was driving on the connector the other day and this babe cuts me off, so I pulls up next to her past a speed trap, and motion for her to accept that she can’t drive. (with my middle finger). So this doll suddenly challenges me to a 70 MPH kickdown and away we go. By the MLK exit we’re doing 120. By I20, we’re in hyper drive. I pulled even with her and I noticed that she was putting on makeup and sexting with her cellphone. So I figures that I should sext her back. That’s when she double shifts and side-swipes a bus filled with nuns. The bus careens into oncoming traffic and explodes. I hit the nitro-turbo switch. I wasn’t about to lose this kickdown. I’ve never lost a kickdown.
I managed to pass the woman in the souped-up Belvedere. I clearly had won. But as I looked over for an acknowledgement, the Plymouth blew by me. She had saved her best for last.
So as we approached I285 so close to Riverdale you could taste it, I notice the dozen or so cops that have suddenly gotten within striking distance. I looked over to the speeding sexpot, she looked over at me, and I gotta say that the look was inviting. I knew I was about to get laid. But, then, I saw the nail-strips that the no-good, dirty coppers had laid out for us ever since we passed the stinking speed trap downtown. (I really hate cops who radio ahead). Suddenly, the babe managed to forge ahead of me. That’s when I saw her go into the curve, and her Belveder started to swerve. I know I’ll never forget that horrible sight. I guess I found out for myself that everyone was right.
Won’t cum at all after deadman’s curve….
(sorry).
Fast and Furious Spending
December 20th, 2011
1:22 am
WorW,
We have to accept that we are self-indulgent and overly-sensitive morons, and that a greater collective is at work here, and that we must provide for the least of us all, and in doing so, we will find that path that will support the masses and ensure peace.
“Overly sensitive”, “morons”, a “greater collective”? You make no sense at all, and if I try to narrow down what you are saying I’m sure I couldn’t get a firm answer. This greater collective crap has been around as long as Marx’s “vanguard” BS (that Marx himself later repudiated). Surely, you’re not saying that those “poor people” (who right now in this country are far more obese than hungry) are going to wring all our necks demanding money and support? Maybe not exactly wanker, but we get the idea ; )
The “path that will support the masses”–again a mass of supporting confusion, as articulate and meaningful as the OWS protests themselves. Crap like “we’re against greed,” is real real specific, isn’t it? Meanwhile, the sum total of their demands read like a Marxist’s wish list–free college, heck, free everything.
If the “masses” are too “stupid” and “overly sensitive” to buy their own healthcare or college education, how in the hell are they going to be smart enough that they can choose someone to do it for them?
Doesn’t work now, WW, does it?
About Europe. Do you really think that its the capitalistic Germans who are going to cause havoc on Europe because they’re financing governments all over the continent? Or is it, (for example) the kleptocratic Greeks who don’t pay their taxes nor balance their own budgets?
There, WW. I thought you were full of crap, and now I’ve proved it.
Let’s start passing our own budgets over here, WW, (something hasn’t happened since Obama) before we go and do anything like “rethink capitalism”–about which you wouldn’t know a good idea unless it weren’t emblazoned with a hammer and sickle
Fast and Furious Spending
December 20th, 2011
1:26 am
W or W @ 116,
Thanks for that brief comment on pop culture.
It actually made about as much sense of Gingrich, Alexander Hamilton, the judciary and our founding fathers as Jay Bookman’s original post.
Wonk or Wank?
December 20th, 2011
1:33 am
The difference between now and 1929 is that the folks really believed that they were being represented by the government, and that FDR’s NEW DEAL would deliver them. Today is the new 1929 with the only difference being the smartphone. We know we’re all Fooked, we can tweet our condition and see that we all pretty much trend the same: we’er f’ing BROKE!!!!
We are broke. Dead broke. Living moment to moment, really. The fear must be overwheliming. I know it is, because I felt it. I lived it for so long. WTF is going to happen to me?
Capitalism is very successful for the least amount of a population of entrepreneurs. The most successful capitalists are the least-in-number of a population of capitalists. The most numerous of capitalists are the least successful. The measure of success is the success of a measure, ($$$$), and by that measurement, most entrepreneurs are the least successful.
In fact most entrepreneurs are dead broke. dead. broke. most. 90 percent? WRONG! 95%? WRONG!!!!
Something over 95% of all of the members of a capitalistic society are dead broke, but it’s been true for years, and look, nothing bad every happened if you discount WW1, (defense industry golden era), or WW2, (Miliatry Industrial Complex Golden Era), or the past fifty years, (Saudi Arabia’s Golden Era).
Iraq was a great xmas present for Cheney’s friends in the Saudi Royal Family who happen to own our entire defense industry which is the very corporations who profited so well from the Iraq War.
Bravo, Cheney. You are the new Hitler. Oh yes you are, don’t be shy, come on. What an achievement!!
War for war’s sake and the profit of war!!!!!
independent thinker
December 20th, 2011
5:02 am
So Antonin Scalia should be removed per Newt if he wrote in Heller that the preamble to the second amendment is a bunch of insignificant verbage- ie. a well regulated militia as a prerequisite for any gun rights?
Bud Wiser
December 20th, 2011
6:06 am
The very thought of a President Gingrich absolutely terrifies you socialists, doesn’t it?
It does, but not for the reasons one should imagine.
For one thing, the gravy train will slide to a halt.
Number two…..well, lets just say that number two will have been swept from power and leave it at that.
It will be fascinating this election cycle to see the desperation from Obama and his drooling minions as the election draws nearer and the outlook becomes clearer. With Eric Holder already playing the race card trying to find a way out of his lying mess, there is just no telling how far over the edge the prez will go to try and keep his day job.
And also, who now will lead the mindless morons of the left …..Pelosi ….. Sharpton …. Hillary???
What a sick joke you dimwits are becoming, and just how soon your party of clowns will vanish into history.
Gingrich 2012
buck@gon
December 20th, 2011
6:22 am
W*W & Ind think,
What do you guys do, distill a bunch of pages printed from moveon and the Nation, put em in a big pot, boil for a few hours, let the excess liquid evaporate, then pour the mixture into a syringe and inject intravenously?
You’re both the perfect Obama voter, OWS protester and Bookman reader. You make nonsense out of sense.
In your circle (jerk) are “Hitler”, “Cheney” and “second amendment preambles” required words?
Fast and Furious Spending
December 20th, 2011
6:31 am
From Gingrich’s own white paper:
“Alexander Hamilton expected the legislative branch would define the reach of the judicial
branch. He argued in Federalist 80 that when the judiciary had to be modified, “the national
legislature will have ample authority to make such exceptions, and to prescribe such regulations
as will be calculated to obviate or remove these inconveniences.”
Hamilton was also confident the judicial branch could never seriously encroach upon the powers
of the legislative branch. Hamilton said it was because the judicial branch had a “total incapacity
to support its usurpations by force.” In Federalist 78, he called the judiciary ““beyond
comparison the weakest of the three departments of power” and the one that could “never attack
with success either of the other two”.
Hamilton further noted in Federalist 81, “There can never be danger that the judges, by a series
of deliberate usurpations on the authority of the legislature, would hazard the united resentment
of the body entrusted with it, while this body was possessed of the means of punishing their
presumption by degrading them from their stations.”
I’ve caught you in distortions before, Jay, but never one this obvious. You have deliberately misrepresented Hamilton. Which “article” makes more sense, your piece of crap or Gingrich’s White Paper? We’ll let history decide when you’re still attacking President Gingrich in three years.
Normal
December 20th, 2011
6:31 am
buck@gon
December 20th, 2011
6:22 am
It’s the “American Way” to disagree with what you say, but defend your right to say it, but I still believe you need less coffee and more fiber in your diet.
Fast and Furious Spending
December 20th, 2011
6:33 am
The judges of the Ninth Circuit sure as hell “hazard the united resentment of the body.”
Gingrich is entirely correct. As Hamilton notes, there needs to be a means of “punishing their presumption by downgrading them from their stations.”
Normal
December 20th, 2011
6:33 am
Speaking of knotheads…
http://news.icanhascheezburger.com/2011/12/19/political-pictures-kim-jong-il-tv-shows/
Tommy Maddox
December 20th, 2011
6:45 am
Splitting the 9th Circuit would not be such a bad idea – just like when they split the 5th Circuit a few years back. The 9th is so large and encompasses around 20% of the US population.
Of course, that would only create a couple of smaller ultra liberal Circuits racing to see who gets reversed first.
Jm
December 20th, 2011
7:17 am
WorW is nuts
Jm
December 20th, 2011
7:20 am
Are circuit judges appointed for life?
Jm
December 20th, 2011
7:22 am
Tired
Meant to say “federal appeals court judges” not “circuit”
Normal
December 20th, 2011
7:25 am
USinUK,
Are you out there?
I wanted to tell you of a “Normal Rockwell” moment I had yesterday with my 3 year old Great Grand Daughter…
She was out with her Nana shopping and when she came home I was raking leaves from our pond area. She stayed out with me, and we talked about her “day”. Then I said I’d better get busy and finish this and I started working again. As I was working, I saw that she was picking up pine straw, one at a time, and putting them in a neat little stack. I asked her if she was making a straw house.
She said, “No Grandpa, I’m helping you.” We hugged and went inside for some cookies and milk.
Good vibes like that just had to be rewarded. Gotta love ‘em…
Jm
December 20th, 2011
7:31 am
Egypt is totally blowing up
Good job Obummer
Jm
December 20th, 2011
7:37 am
Obama sleeping through the 3am call
barking frog
December 20th, 2011
7:45 am
Liberty is safe, even after the attack on it by the Congress of the
United States joined by the President.
Jay
December 20th, 2011
7:56 am
You’re quoting Gingrich’s distortion of Hamilton as evidence that he didn’t distort, F&F?
Do yourself a favor: Go read Hamilton himself and make that judgment. I included the link to his Federalist # 78 for that very reason.
Granny Godzilla
December 20th, 2011
7:58 am
Very well done piece Jay.
Newt 2012
Holy Crap that’s funny
Now to prepare for the Paul bubble.
Jm
December 20th, 2011
7:59 am
Romney folks
Jm
December 20th, 2011
8:01 am
“Paul bubble”
Possible. But mind boggling if it happens
Gale
December 20th, 2011
8:03 am
This stand of Gingrich’s needs to be well publicized. Where judges can be unseated for “unpopular” views, the judiciary becomes a partisan puppet and can no longer protect people’s rights under the law.
Normal
December 20th, 2011
8:03 am
Good morning Granny G.
Got the holiday covered yet? I’m still hunting that elusive gift for the wife…
Normal
December 20th, 2011
8:03 am
Howdy Gale!
Gale
December 20th, 2011
8:05 am
Good morning, cousin Normal!
Normal
December 20th, 2011
8:05 am
Gale,
Sounds like Nazi Germany or any of the now and past Commie countries, doesn’t it?
Jm
December 20th, 2011
8:07 am
The Republican party has a strong second string. It’s betterthan the first string generally.
Problem is. It’s the second string.
But Romney would make a great president. Turnaround and fix government and grow jobs and the economy.
Gale
December 20th, 2011
8:07 am
I was thinking of -was it Pakistan recently that fired all the judges? If Gingrich wants to play historian, he should get his history right.
Jm
December 20th, 2011
8:09 am
This arrest judges thing is more a bad reflection of Iowa politics than it is about newt
Just FYI
Granny Godzilla
December 20th, 2011
8:09 am
Morning Normal
Got the shopping and wrapping and decorating DONE.
(With 35 years of holiday decorations in tubs I get to a point where I just say if it ain’t up yet….it ain’t going up this year)
Started baking, but gotta’ drag home more flour and eggs and sugar.
Mr. G is already sniffing arounf wondering where the cheese straws
and snickerdoodles are hidden.
Ham ordered and I’m picking up the roast beast today.
Golly I look foward to the day after Christmas to put my feet up.
Elusive gift for the wife?
Can’t find it or can’t figure out what it is?
Gale
December 20th, 2011
8:10 am
Funny thing about history. When we see the big picture in retrospect, the man who was president was inconsequential. He was merely the one with the title at that point in time.
Butch Cassidy
December 20th, 2011
8:11 am
A little off topic, but could you GOP supporters PLEASE tell your masters in Washington to start talking to each other? How do you expect others to even think about supporting the GOP party, if the members of the party can’t even support each other? For evidence, just see the tax bill currently circling the bowl in D.C.
Jay
December 20th, 2011
8:13 am
Just FYI, posting will be light the rest of the week. I’m on vacation, y’all.
Gale
December 20th, 2011
8:14 am
Granny, if you know what that elusive gift is, I am all ears.
Keep Up the Good Fight!
December 20th, 2011
8:15 am
Jay, have a great HOLIDAY vacations.
[Waging war!]
Jay
December 20th, 2011
8:15 am
A lot of truth in that Gale.
stands for decibels
December 20th, 2011
8:16 am
Just FYI, posting will be light the rest of the week. I’m on vacation, y’all.
Enjoy, Jay. I’m just about done producin’ myself, this week.
We’ll try not to blow the place up while you’re away.
(right, kids?)
Gale
December 20th, 2011
8:16 am
I am envious, Jay. Just when I might find a few minutes to join the conversation, you tell us to “talk amongst ourselves”.
midtownguy
December 20th, 2011
8:17 am
If it were not for federal judges, we would still have segregated schools in Georgia. A primary function of federal courts is to protect minorities from the will of the majority.
Granny Godzilla
December 20th, 2011
8:19 am
Gale
I love to give the “elusive” gift, but am not always successful.
Best we can do is keep trying. The thought is really what countd
I urge Mr. G (YES YOU MY LOVE) to keep trying – He almost always gets it right.
Keep Up the Good Fight!
December 20th, 2011
8:19 am
midtownguy — are you suggesting what might have happened during the civil rights movement? How many “activist” judges would have been hauled in.
Paul
December 20th, 2011
8:20 am
Morning, Normal
Thought about a gift certificate for a facial or maybe pedicure/manicure for Mrs. Normal? Got a facial certificate for my mom – she put it off for a year, then said it was the most relaxing afternoon she’d had in months. Got a pedicure certificate for my dad last Christmas, mom said he then went every so often just to get his nails clipped and whatever else they do. He was having lots of trouble stretching and his arms give him trouble. It’s something neither would’ve thought of doing for themselves but a gift certificate broke the barrier.
midtownguy
December 20th, 2011
8:23 am
My point exactly.
independent thinker
December 20th, 2011
8:23 am
I think Newt should do away withall appeals courts and the Supreme Court. He is smart enough to decide all legal issues himself. Think of the money we could save.
Normal
December 20th, 2011
8:24 am
Good Idea Paul….
stands for decibels
December 20th, 2011
8:24 am
Oh, and a word to at least a couple of guys who occasionally annoy me with their “I just don’t want to vote for any incumbent, it’s soooo beneath my intellect…” bits here?
(I won’t say their names, but they happen to rhyme with “ScramJet” and “Schmosephus.”)
Ya know, it DOES make a difference. Say what you will of Democratic presidents, but they DON’T appoint Federalist Society scum like Scalito to the Supreme Court.
So if you want to see more Citizens United -type rulings, by all means, don’t sully yourself by voting for the incumbent in the White House, ‘K guys?
Normal
December 20th, 2011
8:25 am
independent thinker
December 20th, 2011
8:23 am
“Think of the money we could save.”
…and the fee’s he could charge for himself…
midtownguy
December 20th, 2011
8:27 am
We could make Newt the Supreme Blessed Ruler and all our problems would be over.
Granny Godzilla
December 20th, 2011
8:30 am
Paul
I love sitting in the mani pedi chair next to my POP…the ladies go
for him big time….
Mick
December 20th, 2011
8:31 am
Jay – Have a great holiday, off for a few days myself. If you get a chance, your encounter with christopher hitchens? Thanks…
scott
December 20th, 2011
8:32 am
I wish Jay would do a column on papers Obama wrote….probably even on the same subject. I am sure he can find them somewhere, right? Wait..what? Obama won’t release them out fear that everybody would find out what a dolt he truly is. Oh……that’s right. Its funny that you hear how this guy is brilliant, yet he doesn’t want to show his brilliance by putting his grades, theses, papers, etc. out there. What’s he hiding?
stands for decibels
December 20th, 2011
8:34 am
We could make Newt the Supreme Blessed Ruler
We already had one of those. I think Newt would be called “Dear Successor”, wouldn’t he?
stands for decibels
December 20th, 2011
8:35 am
Obama won’t release them out fear that everybody would find out what a dolt he truly is.
They get bitter, and they cling to guns, and religion, and Donald Trump’s campaign talking points.
Jm
December 20th, 2011
8:38 am
Scott
Who needs the papers?
Besides being silly, he already looks like a moron
Butch Cassidy
December 20th, 2011
8:38 am
scott – “yet he doesn’t want to show his brilliance by putting his grades, theses, papers, etc. out there. What’s he hiding?’
scott, his history of accomplishments is public knowledge. I’m not a fan of the curretn POTUS, but you are seriously going down the rabbit hole on this one. My goodness, next thing you know you’ll be asking to see his birth certificate.
TaxPayer
December 20th, 2011
8:38 am
If it were not for those federal judges, along with that newfound fed ability to do special things with domesticated terrorists, how could I feel safe walking the streets of North Georgia.
Edward
December 20th, 2011
8:39 am
At the risk of invoking Godwin’s Rule, Gingrich is quickly fashioning himself as the next Adolf-wannabe. Anyone who follows this disgusting piece of filth masquerading as an intellectual should be viewed as irrational and dangerous. But, no worry. Newt, like every GOP buffoon before him, will flame out and be denounced. Hopefully. The GOP has become the Party of the Ridiculous.
Normal
December 20th, 2011
8:39 am
All you ladies out there. A serious question.
Would you be offended or pleased if you received a gift certificate for a consultation for a face lift? My wife is beautiful to me, but she is unhappy of herself. I want to give her something to make her happy, but I don’t know…
Finn McCool
December 20th, 2011
8:39 am
Newt, the gift that keeps on giving.
Butch Cassidy
December 20th, 2011
8:41 am
Finn McCool – “Newt, the gift that keeps on giving.”
Yes, it’s a wonder more in his party don’t support him. Hmmmm…
Finn McCool
December 20th, 2011
8:41 am
That’s why the newspaper industry is dying – too much vacation time for it’s editorial writers!
Gale
December 20th, 2011
8:44 am
I have thought for a while that the most important thing a president does is appoint Federal judges.
USMC
December 20th, 2011
8:44 am
“Just FYI, posting will be light the rest of the week. I’m on vacation, y’all.”–Jay
How Bourgeoisie of you Comrade Bookman!
The workers don’t get “vacation”. Where is the “Social Justice” crowd?
Jay must be part of the 1%; RICH folks!
(have a great vacation, you deserve it after having to read some of our posts)
Donovan
December 20th, 2011
8:46 am
The trouble with you elitists, liberals, and progressives is that when you get your way you screw things up royally. Look at your latest presidential creation and your latest Democrat Senate.
So when you can’t beat W in the first election you kooks try to recount the ballots over and over again. When that fails you kooks run to the Florida liberal Supreme Court and that fails, as well.
You all know as well as I know that in order to further your agenda, that most Americans reject, is to either stack the Congressional deck with Democrats or find a liberal judge to overturn the will of the people.
Very nice oration Mr. Bookman, but I like Newt’s courageous oration better. He says out loud what most Americans think. And that is what scares you liberal boys and girls to death.
Unfortunately, you all are a reflection of San Francisco and Nancy Pelosi.