I know I shouldn’t be surprised that, when discussing the replacement of one out of nine Supreme Court Justices who define the sharpest points of the Constitution our nation is built upon, the mainstream media feels OK to boil the whole thing down to, “well, he’s just going to replace a Librull wih a Librull.” But I still am.
And I’m even more surprised when, in practically the same breath, the same media heads describe the outgoing Justice Souter as, “the George H.W. Bush appointment who was considered a home run for the Conservatives who took a sudden Librull shift once he donned the robe.” One might have thought that one concept woud necessarily override another, perhaps sparking a serious discussion of issues and Constitutional law, rather than simple and irrelevant political labels. That one would apparently be wrong.
