Wednesday, November 05, 2008

O'Conner and Nader, Eight Years Later

I am not sure it is possible to have less respect for former Justice O'Connor than I do. If the newspaper reports are right she was stunned that her retirement might be delayed by a Gore victory. Think of the sense on entitlement to think you should determine who replaces you. And thing of the lack of principles among those Justices who supposedly deferred to State processes until it came to Bush v. Gore. Finally, think of the hypocrisy of law faculties who hated her opinion and understood the lack of principle but have toasted her and fawned over her since her selfish action.

But ultimately is she any worse than the Nader voters who essentially gave the election to the Frat Boy President? In fact, had they not cast their petulant votes, the O'Connor issue would not have arisen. It is too strong to say they have blood on their hands but their carelessness can be traced to suffering of thousands.

It will take years to pull out of the eight year nightmare but for the first time in eight years I do not feel like I have to explain myself and the US when in the company of foreign friends. Finally, I can repeat to the truly upset McCain/Palin/NRA/Swiftboat people a phrase that was popular years ago and addressed to me: My country, Love it or leave it.


Anonymous said...

Jeff, four things.

1. If Justice Stevens retires soon after Obama leaves office, will you write a post calling him out for the arrogance of deciding who will replace him?

2. "My country, Love it or leave it."
-It's not the same when you liberals say it to conservatives. You liberals can go to Canada...or Western Europe...or almost the entire rest of the world. There is no conservative bastion left for conservatives to retreat to.

3. "for the first time in eight years I do not feel like I have to explain myself and the US when in the company of foreign friends."
-Most of us never felt the need to explain ourselves to foreign friends.

4. Have you just given up on this blog being about class bias in higher education?

Jeffrey Harrison said...

1. No less arrogant.

2. I am not sure what a liberal is. Hopefully not the anti intellectuals of higher education. In any case liberals in higher education want no part of the "class" discussion. If I had to assess my own politics I would say left. This year however I do not even know who the socialist candidate was.

3. The fact that some never felt the need speaks volumes about arrogance.

4. I am not sure how "just" fits in here. Why "just given" up rather than given up. The answer is no to both questions and if you read down from the post you commented on you will find recent posts on the knee jerk rejection of Palin by what I think you will call "liberals."

Anonymous said...

2. "This year however I do not even know who the socialist candidate was."-Good point.

3. There was no need because America is not accountable to foreign countries. We do what we do because that's what the American voters decided was best (not good, but best given the alternatives) for America. That's all the explanation any democracy owes.

4. I would also find a post criticizing McCain's advertising and 5 posts dedicated to criticizing Sarah Palin, none of which have anything to do with class bias in higher education.

Anonymous said...

Pardon me, two posts criticizing Sarah Palin that have nothing to do with class bias in higher education.

Jeffrey Harrison said...

Perhaps it was not clear. Although I found the use of Sarah Palin as the most cynical act I have seen by a politician, what I also attempted to point out was that much of the criticism of her seemed to be based on an elitist bias. One of my observations was that the same person with the same views would not have been as objectionable to many if she had graduated from Harvard.
Thanks for the comments.