I enjoyed reading this article, not only because it's good in itself, but also because it's great to find an MSM outlet still prepared to carry this sort of thing. Still, I've got to quibble with one thing: despite their best efforts, lawyers aren't actually sapping the public's will to fight. If they were, they would be able to change the law the old-fashioned way, instead of needing to rely on activist judges to pull insane precedents out of thin air.
Indeed, this is one of the central humbuggeries of the whole thing. For all that these freaks talk about freedom, their whole philosophy is overtly fascistic. True, they say, elected representatives with a mandate from the public can play around passing legislation, but the actual law itself is whatever is decided on by a narrow clique of suitably-enlightened Liberals. Hence, the rise of the philosopher kings on the bench, pronouncing on the way our laws should be. What could be more inimical to freedom than that ?
Indeed, this is one of the central humbuggeries of the whole thing. For all that these freaks talk about freedom, their whole philosophy is overtly fascistic. True, they say, elected representatives with a mandate from the public can play around passing legislation, but the actual law itself is whatever is decided on by a narrow clique of suitably-enlightened Liberals. Hence, the rise of the philosopher kings on the bench, pronouncing on the way our laws should be. What could be more inimical to freedom than that ?
No comments:
Post a Comment