E. J. Dionne, The Washington Post Writers Group

July 13, 2009

E. J. Dionne
The Washington Post Writers Group
1150 15th Street, NW
Washington, D.C 20071

RE: “What about judicial activism from the right?” as asked by you in this morning’s Miami Herald. Once again the cry of “eclectic indignation” is heard in the land.

Mr. Dionne.

Another teaching moment!

In a week replete with boom bass, tinkling brass, and half ass utterances from the elite of modern American Liberalism your judicial comments assaulted me in the predawn hours of South Florida, a place about to be overwatered by melting icebergs and overcome by dying polar bears. Bad enough we have to bear the merdes from Quebec but now we are about to be beset by dying omnivores. I intend to bait my bear traps with baby seals and orphaned manatees

It is now time to include you in the upper levels of the hive. The illuminati are unencumbered by facts and underwhelmed by History. It is a place in which you will thrive.

You cite as an example of the dark clouds of Fascism soon to descend on the United States the fact that the Supreme Court “want[s] to revisit a 19 year old precedent” that was predicated on a Federal law passed in 1947. Further, that law was based on a 1907 Federal law. The horror, the horror, is awful to contemplate. At the end of this process the person who will be most hurt by this is a woman of color, a single mom with children in need of a good Ritalin program who is exploited by the low prices at Wal-Mart. And to show how much these mush brained modern American Liberals care about her she will be unemployed at a higher minimum wage rate come July 23 of this year. Yet another victim of the Bush years who will not be helped by the Stimulus Plan.

Dred Scott v Sanford was the law of the land. I had a distant uncle who repealed it on July 2, 1863 in the Wheat Field at Gettysburg. He is still there, “wrapped in his faded coat of Blue”, a fallen member of the Irish Brigade. He could be called a military activist.

Plessy v Ferguson was the law of the land for 57 years

Are you saying that once the Supreme Court rules on something that it can never again visit the matter? Would not the Logical conclusion of that indicate that not only are you in favor of segregated schools but that you are in favor slavery?





Speaking of the evils of activism, do you remember Bruce Babbitt, the Secretary of the Interior? In 1998 he turned down an application by a Canadian company for a mining permit. [As an aside, there are two things to be said of and or about Secretary Babbitt. #1 – He was on the short list for the Supreme Court until he developed, as legislative activist Chuckie Schumer says of every Republican judicial nominee with an unpaid parking ticket, a “credibility problem” and #2 – If you closed your eyes when he was speaking he was Nixon.] Two of the reasons he gave for turning it down were simple and straightforward: he didn’t want foreign companies owning American minerals and, best of all, the law that covered it, the Mining Act of 1872, was “too old” to be used today. I wrote to him and asked if the 13th, the 14th, and the 15th Amendments were “too old” since they were older. Alas, he never responded. I never asked him about Gibbons v Ogden, Marbury v Madison, or Fletcher v Peck. I left out any references to the Magna Carta. The rights that are ours by birth, “rights from beyond the stars”, were not brought up either

Senator Allen of Virginia used the term “macaca”, shorthand for “the coffee is ready” or “Don’t kill your cows”. He was sent to the moon Io. Justice Ginzburg says that she thought Roe v Wade was to be used to get rid of people we don’t want. She was being true to the judicial activism so beloved of modern American Liberals. Mussolini was much beloved by the Progressives, nee mALs, of the ‘20s and ‘30s. He was their favorite dictator. Do you suppose we can have a czar to get the trains to run on time?

The “teaching moment” involves a heroine of the Left.

Margaret Sanger was the mother of the reproductive rights movement. Every one knows Chapter 1. That’s the one that tells the story of poor women held in bondage by seemingly eternal pregnancies. Her solutions, birth control and abortion, were hailed as a blessing to the nation. Chapter 2 and Chapter 3 went down the memory hole so common to modern American Liberals. She wanted to cull the herd. Anyone of a lesser breed, anyone with mental or physical defects, anyone not essentially blue eyed and blond haired or, at least, of Northern European extraction, was marginal. Justice Holmes was her hero. His dissenting opinion in Buck v Bell [“Three generations of idiots are enough”] was used as an affirmative defense in the Nuremberg trials. Chapter 3 was the inconvenient truth that the Nazis used her writings as the basis for the Nuremberg Race Laws.

Should Governor Palin put her youngest child on one of the last icebergs left so as not to burden society? At least that way he would help the endangered polar bears. Should Senator Kennedy’s sister Kathleen been similarly disposed of?






There have been 50,000,000 million abortions since Roe v Wade. Black women make up about 6% or the population. Some 35% of the abortions in this country in the last 36 years have been performed on Black women. Is that a prima facie case for genocide?

How do you think a “wise Latina Judge” would rule on a civil service test that had the same disproportionate results?

Justice Ginzburg says that she is in favor of eugenics. She says that that the ones we “don’t like” should be done away with. There is no difference whether it is before they are born or if they wind up at a door marked “showers” at Auschwitz..

It’s been 3 days since her interview appeared. Where is the outrage?

She says her tests from high school on were “culturally biased”.

She took the New York State Regents tests as did I.

Was the Geometry test culturally biased? What about Latin 3? How about Biology? Was the Spanish test culturally biased? If so, how?

Last, the case that you say shows the Republican Right-Wing Star Chamber proclivities involves speech. In particular, it involves political speech. The object of the verbal attack was Hillary Clinton. Bush was regularly compared to Hitler. Lincoln was called a baboon by the New York Times. Nat Hentoff wrote a book called “Free Speech for Me but nor Thee”. If you have some free time you may wish to read Federalist X. Madison speaks of “factions” as if they were predecessors to “special interests”. Speech, particularly political speech, is free or it isn’t.

“Congress shall make no law…” If you are not familiar with those words they begin the First Amendment. I envy you the joy when you first read it.

If you don’t understand that send a SASE.

Class dismissed.