Defending the 12th century since the 14th; blogging since the 21st.

Catholicism, Conservatism, the Middle Ages, Opera, and Historical and Literary Objets d'Art blogged by a suburban dad who teaches law and writes stuff.

"Very fun." -- J. Bottum, Editor, FIRST THINGS

"Too modest" -- Elinor Dashwood

"Perhaps the wisest man on the Web" -- Henry Dieterich

"Hat tip: me (but really Cacciaguida)" -- Diana Feygin, Editor, THE YALE FREE PRESS

"You are my sire. You give me confidence to speak. You raise my heart so high that I am no more I." -- Dante

"Fabulous!"-- Warlock D.J. Prod of Didsbury

Who was Cacciaguida? See Dante's PARADISO, Cantos XV, XVI, & XVII.

E-mail me

Tuesday, October 02, 2007
Sinking The Anchoress

This post by The Anchoress got the honor of an Instapundit mention and a link on RealClearPolitics. Glenn Reynolds is no social-conservative, so I don't know whom she thinks she has impressed.

Anyway, her argument -- that pro-lifers must not go third party under any circumstances, because anything's better than Hillary -- is as fine an example as you could want of the kick-me-oh-mighty-GOP attitude that threatens to make prolifers politically irrelevant, as they already are in, e.g., Britain, where they are spread about evenly across all the major parties, and are accordingly ignored by them all.

The Anchoress (not a lawyer, evidently -- sorry, but one of the reasons I took the trouble of becoming a lawyer was so that when I catch non-lawyers writing ignorantly about law, I could say "Not a lawyer, evidently") supports her fears about near-term developments in the Supreme Court, re "compassionate" or "environmental" euthanasia, with links that involve legislative and policy proposals in the U.K. What she needs to make her point are examples of current litigation (not legislation) in the U.S.

Of course rights-claims such as the ones she fears, and others, are on the Left's long-range agenda. But not in the next eight years. They know the public isn't ready. And even if it were, the Court isn't -- which brings me to another fact The Anchoress appears unaware of: at present, the Court's conservatives are relatively young, while its liberals are various combinations of old, sick, and bored.

The next Justice to resign because of age will be Stevens; the next to resign for reasons of health will be Ginsburg; the next to reason just because he feels like it and wants to have a like-minded successor will be Souter. Roberts, Scalia, Kennedy (for better or worse), Thomas, and Alito will all (barring the very untimely and improbable) still be in office in 2017, regardless of who takes office in 2009.

Yes of course it would be a shame to miss the chance to fill those seats. But The Anchoress writes specifically about the Court becoming solidly leftist. Actuarially speaking, that is specifically not what is going to happen: a liberal President replacing liberal Justices will keep the Court where it is now, not move it to the left.

Now, about those news stories about Dobson, the Council for National Policy, and a "Christian" "third party" candidate -- the stories that caused The Anchoress to set sail.

Much ado about nothing. The press loves stories about shadowy rightwing Christians pulling strings. Anything rather than admit that lots of voters will decide, quite on their own, that they can never vote for a scuzzball like Giuliani. The only influence Dobson and the CNP could conceivably have is in tipping those discontented voters toward one protest candidate rather than another.

Weigh anchor, Ma'am.

See also: NCRegister on Rudy