December 12, 2000
Tossing and Turning
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Supreme Court has now
spoken. I tried to fall asleep tonight. I can always fall asleep.
It's staying asleep that is the problem. But tonight, I was left
tossing and turning while my mind raced on and my blood pressure
rose. I thought I had myself prepared for this decision. After
all this is a Conservative Court-only two members selected by
a Democrat. But when it came down it hit me like a rock.
Let's be clear from the start.
If the situations were reversed, the Gores and the Bushies would
have used equal and opposite arguments to plead their case. There
job was to just win, baby. When each side tried to invoke principles
to argue its case, it was like a used car salesman telling you
that all he cares about is that you make an informed decision,
whether he gets the sale or not. Right.
Their are three things that
I just can't let go: equal protection under the laws, the political
nature of the Supreme Court, and Republicans who lack all humility.
I can't believe those Republicans
who actually mock Al Gore for contesting this election (ya, ya
I know the Bushies were the first and most prolific in the courts,
but you know what I mean.) They truly believed they won the election
fair and square and to actually hand count ballots was unfair.
(Sore Loserman signs. These guys think they won in a landslide).
Well, first of all Bushwhackers,
we won the popular vote. It also was no fluke that Gore was declared
a winner early. Were they wrong? No. The Gore respondents thought
they had voted for him. Mark my words. If the anti-scientific
Repubs allow an analysis of the ballots, counting dimples, double
votes and all, Gore wins by 50,000 or I eat the paper this was
written on. This would not have happened if optical scanning
machines were available for all. Lastly, we Democratic partisans
would not have allowed Gore to get out until this was played
out and the vast conspiracy had stilled us.
The Fourteenth Amendment was
written into the Constitution to protect the disenfranchised.
Established to secure the rights of newly freed slaves, the Fourteenth
Amendment is one of a trilogy of Amendments enacted following
the Civil War, and commonly referred to as the Civil War or Reconstruction
Amendments. (The other two are the Thirteenth Amendment which
abolished slavery and the Fifteenth Amendment which ensured a
citizens' right to vote regardless of race or color.)(National Constitution Center)
The irony this year is that this amendment
will be used to to disenfranchise descendants of the very people
it was meant help. Yes, boys and girls, the punch card system
was disproportionately in black voting districts. Seems we can't
use Equal Protection to get equal treatment in the voting booth
any more than we can to get equality of education in school districts.
In the mean time the Republicans use Equal
Protection to not only stop hand recounts, but to eviscerate
Affirmative Action programs and proposals. But this should come
as no shock to you. You may recall that Plesey v. Ferguson in
1896 which brought us that bedrock principle of "Separate
but Equal" was also an Equal Protection case. Back then,
of course, the conservatives were the Democrats. But the conservatives,
under any label, continue to hold court.
"Why bother to vote",
my friend with the tear in her eye asks with her injured heart,
even as she knows the answer in her mind.
Why did the five Court Conservatives choose the President? Aren't
the Justices above the political fray? Well, no. Not historically.
That's why nobody can be surprised about the decision. Oh, sure,
they couch it in rational legal argument. But make no mistake,
they are political animals. The Democrats are paying a price
for not electing more Presidents and Senators.
The words from this decision which will live
the longest were from Justice Stevens' dissent: " Although
we may never know with complete certainty the identity of the
winner of this election, the identity of the loser is perfectly
clear. It is the Nation's confidence in the judge as an impartial
guardian of the rule of law."
The Courts remind me a little of the scientific
process. Individual scientists can and will be very dogmatic
and often wrong in their hypotheses and assertions. But the process
of the scientific method will see to it that observational truth
wins out over the long run.
Likewise the Justice System will have ideological
players. But over the long run, the process with its built in
protections will attend to the greater good. But over the short
term, we must live with a President and his executive underlings
that doesn't care about the interests of those who truly need
a help up. Compassion (as in Conservative)? The whole world is
watching. And I still can't get to sleep.
Home
|