Elena Kagan is Emblematic

Pres. Obama's 2nd pick for U.S. Supreme Court Justice is a Poster-Child for all that's wrong with our current political leadership.

In her opening remarks she explicitly stated that she will decide cases based on 1) Principle, and 2) The Constitution. So, what does that mean? Whatever it means, it clearly places The Constitution behind "principle." Her principles? Established judicial principle? The Principle of re-defining the Constitution?

In 1996, Miss Kagan was White House Policy Counsel to President Bill Clinton. At that time, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists [ACOG] issued a statement regarding Partial Birth Abortion. They call it "an intact D&X."

The findings from the ACOG read: "...in the vast majority of cases, selection of the partial birth procedure is not necessary to avert serious adverse consequences to a woman's health." [Kagan Memorandum]

In a subsequent memorandum, Miss Kagan wrote that the draft ACOG formulation "would be a disaster -- not the less so (in fact, the more so) because ACOG continues to oppose the legislation."

So, she crafted an alternative statement, faxing it to ACOG's legislative director, that said, "An intact D&X, however, may be the best or most appropriate procedure in a particular circumstance to save the life or preserve the health of a woman."

The Executive Board (not the Task Force that studied the issue) inserted it, verbatim, into the final statement."

This statement became one of the greatest evidentiary hurdles faced by the Justice Department lawyers in defending the Federal ban. Kagan's role in all this was never disclosed to the courts.

The political scrawling of a biased White House appointee became the pivotal point in a serious legal and moral issue. One that subjects innocent children to one of the most gruesome methods of death man has devised.

For what? Principle or Constitutional Law?

This is the height of Post-Modern morality: the ends justify the means; redefine the words to suit your need. She will make but TWO of these, on the U.S. Supreme Court. Even the other two liberals aren't this bad!

But, understand, even the most conservative President we may get, in the future, is tainted by this philosophy and will bring us more of the same.

Recently I was labeled a 'bigot' (again) by someone using, not the Dictionary definition, but the "popular definition" of the word. A definition that is skewed toward a politically-correct view of the world. Not the Dictionary Definition.

Get used to it!

We Are About To Be Deemed Irrelevant

In the not-too-distant-past, in America, every child and every adult shared a common morality. They did not express it perfectly. They did not express it consistently. But we all knew what was right and what was wrong.

A stranger could correct your child for wrong behavior and you would appreciate it. Not only that, but the child would respond to it and change whatever they were doing. This behavior, on the part of the child, would be done with respect and politeness.

The moral standard we all shared, was biblical. It was the standard handed down through the Levitical Law and the Commandments of Jesus. It was taught in Public Schools and in Churches. It was taught in homes and in the public square. It was not oppressive, it was protective.

And it's gone! When it left, it took our American Heritage with it. All we're left with is the shell. We have a semblance of decency in our public face but behind that there is nothing of value to stand upon. Truth is whatever I want it to be. Character is whatever I think it to be. Every family, every community, every business has a different value-system. Words don't even mean what you think they mean.

And now, the U.S. House of Representatives is about to "Deem" the Health Care Bill to have passed, without ever voting to pass it!

Did you think you would live long enough to see the United States of America being sold down the river on this flimsy raft? Once Health Care becomes Law, it will grow and expand, until it becomes what Canada has and what Europe has: another nail in the coffin of individualism and personal responsibility.

So called Christians are telling us this is a 'moral imperative.' This from the same Bible that tells us, "if a any would not work, neither should he eat." [II Thess. 3:10] The context is a condemnation of disorderliness in living.

Take away mans' responsibility and he suffers in ways that can only destroy the society that sought to do him good. Once freed from the constraints of duty and responsibility, he is free to satiate his desires in more trivial pursuits. The end result being a man, a family, society must now take care of, completely.

The voices of reason, responsibility, independence and all things constructive, have been deemed irrelevant. In their place has come a new "Master," a new "Slave Owner." It's name: Self. The humanist's god. A most voracious task-master. One who's appetite is never satisfied.