Monday, October 10, 2005

What type of judge is Bush looking for?

In one of his recent defensees of Harriet Miers, Bush said this to reporters concerning her lack of history or written opinions: "Miers knows exactly what type of judge I'm looking for." Now, I think it could be universally agreed that that statement is code for, "psst, hey you, religious base. It's okay." But I like to take the statement more at face value, and then ask the question: so...what type of judge is Bush looking for?

You see, the type of judge Bush is looking for could probably be best predicted by what Bush has cared about most during his tenure in office. So, let's name the things that Bush and his congress has accomplished or pushed for here on the domestic policy front, and divide them by into two categories:

1) corporate money
2) social and religious issues.

I make this division in this method because it is well known that one cannot serve both the Lord and Mammon. So, let's get to it.

IN CATEGORY ONE:

Privatizing Social Security; rollbacks of environment regulations; massive energy industry subsidies; regressive tax cuts; estate tax repeal; disallowing the federal government from negotiating with the pharmaceutical industry; no-bid contracts for Halliburton and other oil services firms; I'm sure the list goes on and on.

IN CATEGORY TWO:

Well...let's see...this is a tough one. I guess we can name the faith-based charities initiative, and the recent attempt to allow political contributions from churches. But even these in and of themselves are money-related. What about pure social issues? Reproductive rights, domestic partnership issues, and other things? I think there are only two things I can really name in this regard: one is the "partial-birth abortion" ban, which was unconstitutional from the moment of its creation for failing to provide exemptions for the life of the mother (and they all knew it), and another is the push for abstinence-only education. And Terri Schiavo, I suppose--but that's political opportunism, not policy initiative.

My conclusion here is that Bush obviously supports Mammon, with actually very little regard for god--because lots of what he has done for "God" has only been to allow God's followers to provide his allies with more Mammon.

So when Bush tells the zealots that Miers knows exactly what type of judge he's looking for, they all assume that's a good thing. But based on Bush's history, I think they're making the wrong assumption. "By their fruits ye shall know them," the scripture says--and Bush's tree has borne enough fruit for everyone to know exactly what type of shrub he really is.

Hey! A shout out to all the radical religous conservatives: If it hadn't been beaten into you to do whatever the leader tells you, you might actually be able to draw these connections for yourself. But since you keep on trusting so much, the burden falls upon me to enlighten you. And then, when you have Chief Justice Roberts and Associate Justice Miers, with a Democratic president and congress in 2008 and many of your former targets of unmitigated praise and adulation indicted, and Roe and Griswold still aren't overturned, and the civil rights movement finishes its march toward its just end--equal economic opportunities for gays--, and the Democratic administration tries something, anything, to slow down our economic depending on Asia's floating our massively bloated debt...when all that happens, there I'll be, writing on this blog laughing at you for not voting for the Constitution Party and ruining America by giving its reins to plundering Neocon corporate overlords.