November 6, 2012

Ronald Dworkin finds it "regrettable that the general public takes so little interest in the Supreme Court" and thinks that's why the Obama campaign "rarely mentions" it.

Here's his big essay in the NYRB.

I think the Obama campaign avoids that issue because its research says that people want judges that interpret the Constitution based on text and original meaning/intent. Obama's vulnerable on the Supreme Court question. He benefits from whatever lack of interest can be maintained.

39 comments:

traditionalguy said...

I bet Obama has a short list for new SCOTUS nominees taken from among his Czars and EPA Dictators.

Seven Machos said...

Ronald Dworkin finds it regrettable that people aren't impassioned about the same thing he is impassioned by.

So what? Big deal. Couldn't the same thing be said by people who love model airplanes? Couldn't the same thing be said by Gary Glitter?

AF said...

"I think the Obama campaign avoids that issue because its research says that people want judges that interpret the Constitution based on text and original meaning/intent."

Okay, we've established why Obama avoids the issue. Why does Romney avoid it?

Shouting Thomas said...

Ugh!

How you supposed to read this piece of crap when, in the first two paragraphs, the bastard deliberately misstates the policy objectives of the Tea Party and insists on a relationship between the Tea Party and Romney that doesn't exist?

Bad faith article.

Shouting Thomas said...

In other words, the authors construct a laughable strawman and then proceed to do what?

Matthew Sablan said...

Why don't we talk about the Supreme Court? Because the Affordable Care Act is a tax.

Rusty said...

machine said...
"Something Chrysler is not doing: shifting Jeep production and jobs to China. Something Chrysler is doing: giving workers the day off to vote."

Karma...it burns...

Penumbras.To the left it's all about the Penumbras.
Penumbras can't stand close scrutiny.
Penumbras like iced coffee.

EMD said...

You said "Dworkin."

Heh.

DADvocate said...

Obama's vulnerable on the Supreme Court question. He benefits from whatever lack of interest can be maintained.

Pretty much sums it up. How do guys like Dworkin get those jobs?

James Pawlak said...


. President Thomas Jefferson's note on the interpretation of the Constitution: "On every question of construction carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text or invented against it, conform to to the probable one in which it was passed.

SteveR said...

Why does Romney avoid it?

Read the title of the post again. Note the quotation marks.

Kevin said...

Sorry ma'am, but your apolitical Bob Dylan just politicalled.

http://news.yahoo.com/bob-dylan-predicts-obama-landslide-061628696.html

Drago said...

AF: "Okay, we've established why Obama avoids the issue. Why does Romney avoid it?"

That's a good question.

It basically boils down to message overload.

How many "key points" can you base your campaign on and keep some level of message coherency so that the message "burns thru" the culture and the public understands what you want to do?

Think back to 1980, Reagan could have talked about everything, but he boiled it down to a couple of key items: Cut taxes and reduce size of government and rebuild the military.

Given the extent of stagflation we were experiencing at the time along with the continued expansion of Soviet and Chinese geopolitical and military influence, that was more than enough.

In 1984 Reagan doubled down on those themes with "Morning in America" and "There's a Bear in the Woods".

If you've never seen the "Bear in the Woods" campaign commercial, you should watch it.

Bender said...

Rarely mention it???

By far, the NUMBER ONE issue in the Obama ads here in Northern Virginia has been abortion and how Romney is supposedly this big threat to it.

AF said...

SteveR: "Read the title of the post again. Note the quotation marks."

So I take it you agree with Dworkin and disagree with Althouse? The two professors have offered different explanations as to why Obama avoids the issue. The quotation marks in the title of the post are from Dworkin. My question was directed at Althouse.

edutcher said...

The Lefties have counted on legislating through the appellate courts since that unReconstructed Confederate and arrant racist Woody Wilson.

Most Conservatives understand the next POTUS will appoint 2 - 4 SCOTUS Justices and they intend to vote accordingly.

Seven Machos said...

Kevin -- Scroll through the posts today.

Epic fail. How embarrassing for you. How sad.

Troubled Voter said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Shouting Thomas said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
SteveR said...

Well I suppose you haven't been around here very long.

chickelit said...

Must be a slow news day--the threads are so quiet.

suzuki b said...

Hey - saw your trollwork out there oozing its puss through the sick netherworld of right wing hate. nice work. your 'higher' power will be SO pleased. lmfao. You do realize you're a disgrace to your gender, right? Don't publish my comment I could not care any less what you do. But your 'writing' is a joke, babe. Maybe get a REAL JOB.

Lem said...

I don't think Obama cares too much for that branch... he views them a though they were an empathy bureau... you know something that he would take care of, if it hadn't been set up that way.

Rabel said...

Dworkin in 2008

His delusional infatuation with Obama exhibited in the same forum in 2008 is a little sickening.

For some reason he chose not to reprise that in his 2012 article.

Seven Machos said...

What's with the trolls? Who knew Ronnie Dworking had a fan club? Sock puppets?

clint said...

Is something wrong at Instapundit -- I haven't seen a single new post there since 9 AM.

Marshal said...

Seven Machos said...
What's with the trolls?


This is the day their hate burns brightest, and they're going to make the most of it.

Marshal said...

clint said...
Is something wrong at Instapundit -- I haven't seen a single new post there since 9 AM.


From instapundit.

IRONY CAN BE AWFULLY IRONIC SOMETIMES: As Matt Drudge paraphrases, UN poll-watchers ‘amazed’ US doesn’t require ID’s to vote…

Speaking of which, so is David Frum, writing at CNN.

They’re not the only ones.

Posted at 4:20 pm by Ed Driscoll

Tyrone Slothrop said...

@clint

Instapundit is up-to-date for me, last post about one minute ago. It sounds to me like you are seeing a version that was cached.

Earlier, Althouse was taking 3-4 minutes to load. I suspect heavy traffic.

clint said...

Huh. Yeah -- killed my instapundit window and loaded it again. Still got the old/cached version. Did it again, then got the up-to-date one.

*shrug*

Several sites seem to be getting extra traffic today...

Lem said...

Intrade still favoring Obama 69% to 30% for Romney.

Whatsupwiththat?

phx said...

Must be a slow news day--the threads are so quiet.

Erf erf erf!

mccullough said...

Obama didn't even mention I the debates that he appointed 2 women to the Supreme Court. When that one young lady in the town hall asked about women's pay compared to men, Obama talked about Lily Ledbetter Act and didn't mention appointing Sotomayor and Kagan. I'm sure he doesn't want to remind the bitter clingers that Sotomayor sided with the dissent in McDonald and thinks the states or local governments can prevent the bitter clingers from owning handguns in their home for self defense. The NRA has poured in a bunch of money against Obama for the Sotomayor nomination.

mccullough said...

Obama didn't even mention I the debates that he appointed 2 women to the Supreme Court. When that one young lady in the town hall asked about women's pay compared to men, Obama talked about Lily Ledbetter Act and didn't mention appointing Sotomayor and Kagan. I'm sure he doesn't want to remind the bitter clingers that Sotomayor sided with the dissent in McDonald and thinks the states or local governments can prevent the bitter clingers from owning handguns in their home for self defense. The NRA has poured in a bunch of money against Obama for the Sotomayor nomination.

Saint Croix said...

Ronald Dworkin is the Oxford version of the Prom Mom.

Saint Croix said...

Now I'm thinking of Dworkin strangling a baby in a toilet.

If in pain and alone, he made the terrible choice to strangle a scissor-ripped newborn, is there no pity for this Oxford scholar?

Kirk Parker said...

... and the general public returns the favor, finding Dworkin regrettable in oh so many ways.

Kirk Parker said...

That is, I mean that's the attitude of the 2.4% of the general public who have even heard of him.

NotquiteunBuckley said...

Any not racist, as I have proven myself again and again, will tell you now, not via email which I did months and months and months ago, that C. Thomas is the one.

The only noncunt on the Supreme Court, and I say that as someone who thinks A.S. didn't learn much from neither Reagan nor Buckley.

So Fuck the aged Scalia.

Here's to The Thomas Court, Justified Only Via The Constitution Of The United States Of America And Nothing Less.

And Nothing Less.