What is it with government servants who won’t go away when they are no longer government servants? We are repeatedly assaulted with the harangues of Carter and Clinton and now Sandra Day O’Conner had her two cents worth by weighing in with the following:  She told an audience at Georgetown University that Republican proposals, and their sometimes uncivil tone, pose a danger to the independence of the judiciary, and the freedoms of all Americans. (www.Drudgereport.com  item NPR March 10, 2006.)  Uncivil? Dangerous to judicial independence? How dare she think it, much less say it given her record of voting against the Constitution?

The woman needs to explain her statements about calling on foreign law to make decisions in this nation. She voted with those who used foreign laws to decide several cases. Of course, this is balance and middle of the road that recognizes changes in thinking that the Constitution stifles if it is followed.

Ex Justice O’Conner took an oath to honor, uphold, and defend the Constitution of the United States. Her very glaring conduct while on the court testified to the fact she didn’t follow her oath as she swore she would do. It is easily understood that she would take criticism as being uncivil since it calls into question her less than stellar support of the nation’s laws. Anytime poobahs of her ilk are criticized it is uncivil according to them.

Now to the danger she expressed. She was one of the members who helped take us further down the road to liberal socialist doctrines. She believes that judges can do as they please and make rulings that please them regardless of the requirements of the nation’s laws and moral foundations. Independence to her is “we will do as we see fit and there is nothing that you can do about it.” There is something that can be done and it is called impeachment and removal from office. However, there aren’t enough in Congress with the backbone to bring it about. They sit there and wag their heads like Bo Bo clowns, if they are even that aware of judicial misbehavior.

In a speech, O’Conner said, "The impressions we create in this world are important, and they can leave their mark." She also said that American courts need to pay more attention to international legal decisions to help create a more favorable impression abroad. They do leave their mark and she left hers of dishonoring our nation and its Constitution. And pray tell why turning away from our laws helps other nations see us in a more favorable light? Does the adherence to our statutes so anger others that we must give in to their ways so they will like us more? According to O’Conner that is what she thinks and that is what she did when she ruled on certain cases.

When she departed the court the liberal whiners were aghast that the balance of the court would be lost. Balance? Since when is balance good for our people when our laws and ways are flouted so the anti-crowd can be appeased? Her leaving was good riddance and our gain as a nation.

In retrospect it can be said that she went away before she did any more damage to our nation. In Sorting It Out, since she went away it would be good to say to her, “Now go away and stay away. Thankfully your days are over.”

© 03-10-2006 DEC