Our Constitution has a clear process for appointing judges.

Like it or not, the people of the United States have selected a Republican president and granted the Republicans a Senate majority.

This is how the game is played. By the rules.

Hell, they could appoint me to the Supreme Court if they wanted.

This is not to say that the voters shouldn’t register their approval or disapproval of Bush’s picks at the polls come Congressional election time.

I like to think that a Smallholder appointment would lock up the key “hot organic chick” voting bloc.

Super seekrit note to George: Just remember that ‘ol Marky is available and I am more qualified than Harriet Meirs was, having thought about and discussed Constitutional law at some point in my life. Added bonus: Clerk Presly!

He has a steady judicial philosophy.

His track record shows that he weighs each case and measures it against our Constitution.

He does not seem to be an outcome-oriented judge.

And whether or not you agree with his particular brand of interpretive thought, it is predictable and legislatures can tailor legislation accordingly. Outcome-focused folks often think that appointing a judge who will vote a certain way regardless of the facts or Constitution is a panacea. But whim-based, willy-nilly jurisprudence is bad for society. Gradual evolution is the way to go, if evolution is required.

I’d rather have a competent jurist with whom I might disagree (Alito) than an incomptent cipher (Meirs).

Actually, although it is the moonbats who are currently suffering seizures, I suspect the right may be less than fully satisfied with Alito’s constitutionally-based intepretation. As a fan of stare decisis, he’s unlikely to broadly overturn precedent. In fact, the abortion case that is making the left swoon should be giving palpitations to the pro-life crowd. Given a chance to argue against the constitutional reasoning of Roe v. Wade, he seems to have accepted the idea that abortion is a right, but the government can regulate some aspects as long as it doesn’t create an undue burden.

Winston Churchill once offered a woman a million pounds to sleep with him. She accepted. He then reduced his offer to one pound. “Winston!” She cried in dismay, “What kind of woman do you think I am?” “We have already established that. Now we are dickering over price.”

Alito apparantly accepts Roe v. Wade. He was just dickering over the definition of undue burden.

For the record, in Casey, I would have ruled the same way. If a married woman is aborting her child, the husband ought to be informed. He ought not to be able to stop her, but if he wants children, he ought to be able to make the decision about whether to stay in the marriage.

I haven’t read the machine gun case, but I understand Alito was against the regulation not because of some imagined 2nd Amendment right of individuals, but bcause the government doesn’t have an enumerated power and it wasn’t a necessary and proper law in the regulation of infrastate trade.

I’ve said before that ID is bad for Christians.

Not only does it ask us to give up the rational minds God gave us, it now also apparantly makes liars out of us:

Bad liars.

Stupid liars.

Drug-addled liars.

Funny little editorial here.

Found indirectly through Rite Wing TechnoPagan.

Greetings, loyal minions. Your Maximum Leader, today, will bloviate on the chosen Men’s Club/Diva’s topic. That topic is: Who really has the upper hand in the different stages of a relationship? During dating is it typically men? Then after marriage is it typically women?

Well, your Maximum Leader turned this question over in his mind again and again. The more he thought about it, the clearer his views on this subject became. And as his thoughts became clearer he realized his post was becoming shorter and shorter.

Why you ask yourself? Because to put a really fine point on it, women always have “hand.” When you are dating there might be slight backs-and-forths in the “hand” department. But in the end the woman always has “hand.” Marriage is pretty much the same deal. From time to time a man might find himself in a position where he believes he has “hand” over a woman. But this perception is really an illusion.

Yes dear minions, if a man perceives that he has more “hand” than does a woman in whatever stage of their relationship he is deluding himself. Because the woman - and the woman alone - posesses the neutron bomb of “hand.” This is to say that she has a vagina. So long as this biological fact remains a fact a woman will always have the “upper hand” in a relationship.

You see, men, for all their bluster and machismo, are rather simple creatures. Provide a manwith food and shelter and the only other things he needs in life are sex and television. (NB: Television can be replaced with computer games/internet porn if you like.) The mind of a man is warped by sex and the pursuit of sex. When we aren’t consciously thinking about sex our unconscious libido is doing the thinking for us. This is why a man can - at any moment - have an erection. He might be in the middle of a business presentation, brain surgery, a NASCAR race, anything really; when suddenly his “little friend” suddenly becomes alert and ready for action.

Because of this simple fact a man is always willing to trade “hand” for sex. And if you are always willing to trade away any “hand” you may have earned - it can really be said that you possess no “hand” at all.

Here endeth the exposition.

Read more on these other quality sites! Phin, Jameseyboy, Stiggy, Teafizz, The Wizard, Sadie, Kathy, Silk, Paula, and Phoenix.

Carry on.

Scooter indicted
Rusty: Perjury not bad
Moinca’s man: Whew!

Oil companies gouge
Bad oil! What right do they have?
Um… supply/demand?

Denver has decided
MJ Legalization
Bigho books a flight

Pro-life hails Alito
Suckers! Reverence toward
Stare decisis

Dale Carpenter at Volokh Conspiracy has posted an essay on the slippery slope toward polygamy envisioned by anti-gay marriage activists.

Brian and and I have danced a bit over polygamy. Brian tagged me right smartly for switching arguments midstream, a crime which I will ackowledge.

Based on allowing people to express love, Brian is right that there is no distinction between ssm and polygamy. Carpenter makes a solid case to bar polygamy on other grounds.

The part about polygamy being bad for a democratic society is spot on. Think Bacon’s rebellion (where serial monogamy by plantation owners had the effect of increasing the skew of an already imbalanced sex ratio). The frontier farmers weren’t only rebelling on econoic and defense issues. They were pissed about dying virgins.

The Moral Animal, a book I’ve recommended before, has an excellent section explaining why polygamy is good for women and bad for men from an evolutionary standpoint. Whatever the selfish genes may say, polygamy is bad for democracy.

Which is why, in the Mike World Order’s faux democracy, the monogamy laws will only be set aside for Mike and his Ministers. (Dibs on Jaime!)

He has a new hobby.

Via Michael Yon.

Coldblooded hamster
Cruelly dueling to the death
Die, Fuzzy! Die! Die!

Greetings, loyal minions. Your Maximum Leader poses a question to you all to discuss.

Are movie scores a subgenre of “Classical” music or a genre all their own?

Discuss.

Carry on.
(more…)

Greetings, loyal minions. Your Maximum Leader was sad to hear that our friend Gordon, the Cranky Neocon was closing down his own blog. But we were soon cheered up with the news that Gordon would be joining our other friend Preston Taylor Holmes at Six Meat Buffet.

Cranky has been sort of quiet of late at Six Meat Buffet. Today’s contribution was funny. Frankly, Preston’s post immediately preceeding Cranky’s is funny as well.

You should click over and look. They made your Maximum Leader chuckle.

Carry on.

Greetings, loyal minions. Your Maximum Leader just loves a news article that begins thusly:

Occasionally getting drunk is a core part of national identity for most Australians, according to new research.

Think about that for a second. A CORE part of the national identity of Aussies it to get pissed from time to time. Damnation. No wonder your Maximum Leader loves those Aussies. Oh yeah, in case you didn’t read the article it is here. That link is worth clicking through to view. If only to see the perfectly work safe photo of the two cute Aussie girls standing in front of the Beertopia sign. Radical Islamofacists believe heaven is a place where 72 virgins feed them grapes; your Maximum Leader’s view of heaven is one where hot (morally-liberal) Aussie chicks give him any type of beer he wants.

Of course, beer might not do it for you. You may be a wine drinker. Indeed… Wine drinking might be part of your identity. Just the other day your Maximum Leader learned a little something about two certain someone’s identity when he visited the local Giant. He even took a photo of what he saw on his cell phone to share with you all. In the beer and wine dept he noticed this shelf…

Can’t read the label? Click below the fold for the close up.
(more…)

Greetings, loyal minions. Your Maximum Leader sort of assumes that many of his like-minded (politically like-minded that is) minions already read the Wall Street Journal’s Opinion Journal page daily. But just in case you don’t, cruise on over and read the piece by Francis Fukuyama about the Netherlands, Theo Van Gogh, and the roots of Radical Islam in Western Europe. It is a very thoughtful piece.

Carry on.

Greetings, loyal minions. Your Maximum Leader thinks you have some time to kill and figures he’ll suggest a few quizzes a give you a meme to review to take up some of your time…

First… The meme… Because all the cool kids are doing it.

It is the average American Meme. All the items listed are things that apply to average Americans. The ones crossed out are the ones that do not apply to your Maximum Leader. Pithy commentary in italics.

Eats peanut butter at least once a week. Your Maximum Leader had to think hard on this one, but then realized that in fact it has been about three weeks since he’s had peanut butter. (But only about 3 hours since he ate some peanuts.)

Prefers smooth peanut butter over chunky. Your Maximum Leader thinks chunky peanut butter is positively barbaric.

Can name all Three Stooges. But why would you want to. The Marx Brothers are far superior.

Lives within a 20-minute drive of a Wal-Mart.

Eats at McDonald’s at least once a year. With little kids who think that McDonalds is the finest of all eateries…

Takes a shower for approximately 10.4 minutes a day Likes to take much longer showers.

Never sings in the shower. You wouldn’t want to listen when he does.

Lives in a house, not an apartment or condominium.

Has a home valued between $100,000 and $300,000.

Has fired a gun. He even owns a few.

Is between 5 feet and 6 feet tall Six foot three actually.

Weighs 135 to 205 pounds Humm… 205 lbs… When was your Maximum Leader last 205 lbs? He thinks it was his sophomore year of college.

Is between the ages of 18 and 53.

Believes gambling is an acceptable entertainment option. Absolutely.

Grew up within 50 miles of current home Just barely out of range actually. Well, it depends on how you parse this. If you go by actual driving route, then you exceed 50 miles. If you go the way the bird flies, he might come in just under 50.

And two quizzes below the fold…

Otherwise…

Carry on.
(more…)

Greetings, loyal minions. Your Maximum Leader reads on the news wire that the dreamy Jennifer Love Hewitt has bought the rights to the story of a Texas hooker/housewife. Ms. Hewitt will produce and star in the film based on a true story.

Humm… The article says the film will be a comedy. Perhaps your Maximum Leader will have to schedule a trip to the movies when it comes out…

Carry on.

Greetings, loyal minions. Your Maximum Leader wanted to withhold voicing an opinion on Samuel Alito until he’d done a little background reading. He’d seen the name before on a whole bunch of “lists” of possible nominations to the Supreme Court. He’d also seen some commentary on Alito from sources he considers likes. All-in-all your Maximum Leader is very pleased with the choice of Alito.

Your Maximum Leader is sure that if you are so inclined you’ve already gone and read the myriad posts by bloggers (of whatever political stripe) and news articles that have flooded the internet and news since yesterday morning. That said there are a few links your Maximum Leader will, nonetheless, point out to you. He particularly likes the quotes that the RNC is getting out from high-profile Democrats on how great Alito was in early confirmation hearings. (Thanks Basil.) Buckethead points to an MSNBC peice that says that Alito wrote a dissent in a case concerning ownership of machine guns. (Your Maximum Leader will have to do more reading on that…) Of course there is always Malkin for a veritable link clearing house.

At what point do people start talking about how this is nothing more than a Rove mind-trick? Really. Your Maximum Leader is waiting for someone out there to say that Miers was just a red-herring so to speak. Bush (under Rove’s guidance) throws out a person who will turn off the base only to have her withdraw and then put up a person who is sure to galvanize the base and put up the big fight to break the will of Senate Democrats to resist. Has anyone espoused that one yet? Your Maximum Leader is sure it is only a matter of hours or days before that one starts around.

Your Maximum Leader believes that the senario he described is too far out to be plausible… But someone out there might buy it.

Your Maximum Leader is enjoying listening to the diversity arguments against Alito. He heard some on the TV this morning… A selection include: “We don’t need another Catholic.” “We don’t need another Italian-American.” “We need another woman.” “We don’t need another white man.” “We need a moderate voice to speak for the mainstream.” But the one we haven’t heard yet is “We don’t need another thoughtful judge in the mold of Scalia.”

Carry on.