The Appalling Silence of Conservatives as Judge Roy Moore Battles Judicial Tyranny Alone Daniel Horowitz
October 11, 2016
Listen to the podcast at the link:
https://www.conservativereview.com/commentary/2016/10/conservative-conscience-appalling-silence-of-conservatives-ep63Here are the podcast notes:
Podcast Show Notes
In this episode of the Conservative Conscience, Daniel discusses how the corrosive modus operandi of so many in the conservative movement has allowed them to focus exclusively on nonsense and ignore the most important story of the week. Judge Roy Moore stands alone in his battle for marriage, the Constitution, federalism, and state sovereignty, yet the conservative media couldn’t care less that he was wrongly suspended.
Daniel goes on to explain just how severely the judicial crisis is plaguing our nation and how only a society of beta males would allow it to happen. He further offers insight, using the Alabama case study, as to why state courts are better suited to handle cases dealing with social questions and why the federal judiciary must be denuded of any power over such political questions.
When you become entitled to exercise the right of voting for public officers, let it be impressed on your mind that God commands you to choose for rulers, “just men who will rule in the fear of God.” The preservation of government depends on the faithful discharge of this duty; if the citizens neglect their duty and place unprincipled men in office, the government will soon be corrupted; laws will be made, not for the public good so much as for selfish or local purposes; corrupt or incompetent men will be appointed to execute the laws; the public revenues will be sqandered (sic) on unworthy men; and the rights of the citizens will be violated or disregarded. If a republican government fails to secure public prosperity and happiness, it must be because the citizens neglect the divine commands, and elect bad men to make and administer the laws.
— Noah Webster, History of the United States (New Haven: Durrie & Peck, 1832), pp. 336-337
Neither the Founding generation nor their children nor their children's children, right on down to our grandparents' generation, were so passive about their role as republican citizens. They would not have accepted-did not accept-being told that a lawyerly elite had charge of the Constitution, and they would have been incredulous if told (as we are often told today) that the main reason to worry about who becomes president is that the winner will control judicial appointments. Something would have gone terribly wrong, they believed, if an unelected judiciary were being given that kind of importance and deference. Perhaps such a country could still be called democratic, but it would no longer be the kind of democracy Americans had fought and died and struggled to create.
— Larry D. Kramer, The People Themselves: Popular Constitutionalism and Judicial Review (New York: Oxford University Press, 2004), 228.
