Bucks County Herald – June 3, 2010

Elena Kagan, DN reply, Joe Campbell, Supreme Court

 

Dear Friends,

            Good morning. Last week, I discussed Dr. Joseph Campbell’s and my discussion about immigration. The Bucks County Coroner always has something interesting to say. The other day, he criticized President Obama’s recent nomination of Elena Kagan for the U. S. Supreme Court.

            “She’s never been a judge,” Dr. Campbell told me, meaning that Kagan has no track record on the important topics of today.

            I thought about this lack of judicial experience and ran a Google search on the Internet: “How many U.S. Supreme Court justices were not judges when they were nominated?” I was astounded with the results.

            There were 66 Justices (14 Chief Justices and 52 Associate Justices) who had no judicial experience prior to their elevation to the highest court in the land. In fact, 23 of the 66 justices were appointed in my lifetime.

            One of the most important cases of the 20th Century was the decision, which ended segregation in the public schools. Brown versus the Board of Education was decided 9- 0 by the [Earl] Warren court in 1954. Not only was the Chief Justice (Warren) not a judge prior to his appointment, seven others on that court weren’t either.

            Jeffrey Toobin wrote an excellent book about the U. S. Supreme Court. Titled “The Nine,” Toobin tells us that when it comes to the U.S. Supreme Court, the American public gets what it deserves…namely that voters elect Presidents who make those appointments. It is unlikely that President Obama would appoint conservative justices just as it was unlikely for President George W. Bush to appoint a liberal.

            I’m a Republican and I do get weary of my Party claiming that only the GOP nominates “mainstream” candidates whereas Democratic Presidents nominate judicial activists. What nonsense! Haven’t you noticed that whenever the minority party is criticizing the majority party’s judicial nomination, the charge is always “judicial activism…or judges who’d rewrite the U.S. Constitution. Both parties are guilty.

 

            These days, the actions in the congress, especially the U. S. Senate, are so uncivil. And that takes me to a letter which one of my favorite critics sent to me. Because he wishes to remain anonymous, I’ll use his initials (DN).

            He didn’t like my April 29th column about Dr. Michael Delli Carpini’s presentation at the Phillips Mill’s Forum on April 23. The lack of public civility was the topic. Here’s the gist of his letter.

            “Ah CIVILITY,” DN began. “That happens when our LIBPRO (liberal/progressive) friends are controlling the public discourse, where ONLY those who share their utopian view of society are considered to be engaging in a civil dissertation! In such a ONE-WORLD society, everyone is so fully encompassed by equality, where no one rises above certain levels of competency or achievement, such being predetermined by such society…Hence none are allowed to exceed certain standardized formulized criteria, so that NO ONE is allowed to improve themselves above the level (however nominal) of their neighbors. Where there is (supposedly) NO conflict, NO poverty, NO competition of any kind, NO individual thought that might be troubling to or diminishing of one’s neighbor.

            “So, what happened to CIVILITY in the public discourse during the eight year presidency of George W. Bush,” DN asks? “Except for Harry S. Truman during the post WWII years, I cannot recall any president, while U.S. armed forces were engaging in military combat abroad, being so VILIFIED as George W. Bush, his Vice President Dick Cheney, Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld…by the MEDIA, the LIBPRO establishment, together with leading members of the DEMO party…Where was all this feigned concern about CIVILITY in the public discourse THEN?

            “Can your direct me to any of your own Free Press columns from that era, condemning or even chastising the MEDIA, LIBPRO elements, or DEMO party leadership for their lack of civility in the nasty, scurrilous, vilification that was heaped upon the Bush administration throughout Mr. Bush’s two terms in office,” DN continues?

            “With innumerable polls of public sentiment, by even the administration’s OWN polling resources, rather clearly expressing general public DISAPPROVAL of the policies of our present administration…well deserved public discontent seems to be providing the catalyst for the current tenor of our present public discourse.

            “Perhaps in a future column you will be good enough to provide us with Mr. Carpini’s OWN ideas of just HOW the U.S. can increase manufacturing when the very labor unions who drove most manufacturing overseas, are still clamoring for even higher wages and greater health and retirement benefits,” DN asks?

            “Likewise, exactly HOW would he have us become more COSMOPOLITAN, when our sophistication and savoir faire have long since abandoned many of our formerly highly cultured urban centers, which are for the most part now heavily populated, crime ridden, with poverty stricken, uneducated or poorly educated, masses of humanity…(being daily supplemented with additional swarms of illegal immigrants)?

            “I must agree with at lest ONE of Dr. Carpini’s observations,” DN says. “At least in the future, the USA will NOT be a super power, especially when the Chinese begin calling in all the U.S. debt they have accumulated.”

            Here’s DN’s final point:

            “The reason TALK RADIO and TV programs are so popular,” DN concludes, “is because the Main Line media, both print and video have FAILED to provide the public with the kind of honest in-depth, investigative reporting of the unvarnished FACTS involved in most news stories.”

            DN has little faith in the mainstream media, or me for that matter. He insists that talk-radio and cable TV news programs serve him better because he can check for accuracy via the Internet.

            I’m certain that DN is speaking for a sizable population. It will be interesting to analyze the results of the May 18th primary. Did the mainstream media misjudge the extent of the Tea Party activists? Was the anti incumbent mood real? And if so, was it responsible for ending the careers of politicians who wore out their welcome?

            In any event, I’m not worried about Elena Kagan’s nomination to the Supreme Court. She’s performed every legal assignment except judge. She’s been a trial lawyer, law professor, Dean of the Harvard law School, and Solicitor General. As Jeffrey Toobin wrote…after all, we get what we deserve.

            Sincerely,

            Charles Meredith