Posted On: Thursday - November 30th 2017 6:40AM MST
In Topics: Pundits US Feral Government
The former politician, presidential adviser, and TV talking head, now pundit, Mr. Pat Buchanan lays out a bunch of political logic to illustrate that this one senate election will be critical to the anti-abortion cause (via Supreme Court justices, etc.) Hey, Peak Stupidity has lots of respect for the views of Pat Buchanan. His heart is in the right place, and as we've written numerous times (somewhere) the country would be in a whole lot better shape now if he had kept his momentum in the 1992 R-presidential primary campaign. The Lyin' Press was not his friend, of course.
Firstly, this post is not about abortion and Roe vs. Wade. It's about the Supreme Court. Again, in Buchanan's article, his heart is in the right place, and he runs through the scenario with the supreme and lower court pick numbers. Now, I'm not saying that the Supreme Court is not important, in fact they are far from it and OUT! OF! CONTROL!. My point here is that Mr. Buchanan is living in the past as far as his idea of how the American political system works in 2017. He writes about political strategy as in how many votes "we" get if this happens, and what the Senate rules are with the "nuclear option" having been set up by the D's, and it's gonna work against them .. blah blah. OK, you DO know how all this works better than a lowly Peak Stupidity blogger, Pat, but listen, things are not as civil politically as you are used to, and they are quickly getting even less civil. The rules don't matter to the cntrl-left, and most of the people we think are on our side are not on our side. I have not seen ANY political legislation/ruling/whatever go in the RIGHT direction since the EARLY 1990's, Pat! The elite have been getting what they want, one way or another.
Next, about the Supreme Court "conservative" picks themselves, in this very article, my main argument with his point is backed up by Mr. Buchanan right there in the same article! He lists 5 (or 7, if your main issue is abortion) S.C. justices that were appointed by Republicans from Reagan's term on that went native. What is to say every single one of the new appointees would not do the same, or at least a significant number, and same with the lower courts?
Let me speculate on why these politicians, and, yes, judges at that level are basically politicians, switch views and loyalties, almost always toward the left, after they get in power?
1) Some may actually have a change of their views over time, however, most times it is from living too long in the elitist bubble that they enter.
2) Some just don’t like being one of the bad guys as far as almost all of the Lyin’ Press is concerned. They want to be the good guy on TV, and get invited to all the best dinners and cocktail parties in Washington, FS. It’s peer pressure over principles for these ones.
3) Some may be ringers, in that they may be held up to the public as conservatives when the people behind the scenes know that what their real, anti-constitutional views are. Sure, there is a history, and that history may
4) Some may have plenty of sordid things they have done in the recent past (usually after they have been in some type of office, as that’s when they pick up the psychopathy). They can be blackmailed very easily, cough, cough, John Roberts, cough, to rule in favor of whatever the elites want.
It may not have been the case only 25 years back, but I would say now that my reasons for going native are in least-likely to most-likely order.
Now, Roy Moore himself has been slighted in this post, I just realized, though we have written our support before here. In a follow-up post, later today, I will tie future-Senator Moore in with my reason #4 (about politicians going native).
Comments: