danger, Senator Specter, danger

eYep, wha'cher seein' appeared in my hometown weekly.
In case, you're interested in the quality of its reception, please let me inform you "great". Now then, let's employ some retrospective speculation. Had this ad appeared the day after our president, "dum'ya botch", had vouchsafed . . . . . "MISSION ACCOMPLISHED",
it would've taken a minor miracle to get me through that day, unscathed.

Anyway, my dear Senator, you may as well know that I have a reputation as a wild-eyed iconoclast cum "this laptop for hire". At the moment, I'm wearing my "wild-eyed" cap, and I'm prognosticating what's bound to happen after your president's choice for Supreme Court justice wins bitterly contested approval.

Much of what I'm now prognosticating is already, so to speak, in the cards. Nonetheless, elevating Judge Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court will do much to exacerbate the situation.

For the moment, let's animadvert to the gin of scandals that now ensnare your Republican Party, as voiced by somebody like me, as I begin campaign for your buddy Don's seat in the House of Representatives ...

.... treason suborned -- ah, that's one
... culture of corruption -- ah, that's another
... governance proven incompetent -- ah, still another
... unlawful eavesdropping -- talk about piling on!
... neither liberty nor security -- that's going to take a little explanation

Just for your benefit, Senator Specter, here's what else I plan to pile on. Yes and yes again, I know it's horrible of me. Besides being so juicy, this first one was contributed by your good buddy, George "fancy pants" Will ... ah, ya'know that "F" for his middle initial should mean that. Anyway, I'm going to pigeonhole "conservative virtue" as lack of opportunity for vice.

For the clincher, which by way of reasonable speculation will be the "last straw", I'll rail against the robbery, being perpetrated by credit cards.

Ah, come a little closer to the monitor screen, dear Senator, ever so discretely look around, make sure nobody's looking over your shoulder. This will be just among you and me and the monitor screen. I suspect this robbery happened because ever so many of your colleague legislators presuppose the constituency, solely to whom they must answer, inhabits that lair of lobbyists and former legislator lobbyists, namely , "K" street.

As your political party tries to get ready for this year's congressional elections, my dear Senator, ya'gotta allow that's one hell'uva lot of ignominy to try to get the American public to overlook.

And then, there's the very likely elevation of your president's nominee to the Supreme Court. Maybe, Roe v Wade will be allowed to stand, at least temporarily. No matter, the situation for your party will only get worse.

Here's the thing that gets me about the pro-lifers, who began their thirty-year campaign to get Roe v Wade. They forgot to take into consideration that the sensibilities of the American public can change drastically, given enough time. Well, thirty (30) years is about a generation and a half, by biblical reckoning. And public sensibilities can change drastically.

Again, you're well advised to look around discretely, et cetera. Again, this is just among you and me and the monitor screen. In this rather elongated paragraph, I'm proffering something you can take to the bank. This concerns certain historians, who dive, like cormorants, into the public's psychological cess pool ... aaaay, I'm only trying to be candid, albeit excruciatingly so.

Anyway, as those historians write about the "dum'ya botch" administration, they'll be disgorging one very startling insight. Here goes ... again, look over your shoulder et cetera ... . Nobody's looking over your shoulder? You're sure? Good. If you live long enough, here's you're bound to read: "The man appealed to those G.O.P self-destructive drives, so inevasibly inherent as to approach genetic. The greater his appeal grew, the more those drives intensified.

Towards the end of the 'precocious' termination of his second administration, the appeal had intensified to the point of white hot." ... eYep, dear Senator Specter, that you can take to the bank ... ah, if you do, you'd be well advised to do so, so discreetly as to approach clandestinely. ... eYep, I do like those buck-ninety-eight terms of expression. Oh, alright (!) already, so some of my deathless prose is a tad over the top. Well, as the late world's most talented fop once remarked, "nothing succeeds like excess."

Here's how I see things unfolding. After Alito's elevation, membership in the National Organization of Women (N.O.W) triples. The number of femisymps quintuples. In the years between Alito's elevation and the abrogation of Roe v Wade, a slew of so-called "pro-life" legislators get voted out of office.

After the abrogation of Roe v Wade, membership in N.O.W triples again. The number of femisymps, this time, only triples. The Republican Party gets reduced to a shadow of its former self.

Suddenly, the truth of "better a smart enemy than a stupid friend" dawns on your party's hierarchy. In a twinkling, the steams of money that water the pastorages of Reverends Falwell and Robertson dry up. The Independent Women's Forum goes out of existence for lack of funds. And there are other changes. In their campaigns for election, "pro-life" Republican candidates receive barely a pittance from your national committee. This happens even to ones, running in safe Republican districts.

Oh, alright (!) already, I'll admit it. In this segment, I'm living up to my reputation as a wild-eyed iconoclast. Anyway, I believe it's reasonable to SURMISE that the good senator is hearing from state legislators, who owe their election to support by "pro-life" voters. These legislators would overlook the failure of Judge Alito to get elevated to the Supreme Court.

For years, those aforementioned legislators have been earning their brownie points from their home-state pro-life voters by tinkering along the edges of Roe v Wade, under the guise of protecting the interests of under-age pregnant girls, who by the bye are denied the right to vote. It's one thing to futz around with the fate of under-age girls, it's quite another to do so with that of women, who can vote.

And now, I will conclude with this story. There was a certain MS "pro-choice", who was involved in overt opposition to "pro-life" demonstrations. For a year there, during the height of such demonstrations, she noticed something within herself.

On the way towards countering a pro-life demonstration at an abortion clinic, MS "pro-choice" would have a rather, well, insipid premonition. Each and every time she had that premonition, she would see, upon her arrival at the scene of the pro-life demonstration, a certain divorcee ... oh, let's call her Madame "pro-life" and a young girl, who couldn't have been more than fourteen.

The one time MS "pro-choice" did not have that premonition, Madame "pro-life" was absent from the demonstration.

Well, one fine day, MS "pro-choice" got the call to rally support against a pro-life demonstration outside an abortion clinic in an adjoining state. On her way, she felt that same insipid premonition. But there was a difference.

Madame "pro-life" was nowhere to be seen in the ranks of her colleagues. Nope, she was inside the clinic. And sitting beside her, was the young girl. Well, MS "pro-choice" took one look at the girl, and she knew that child's story.

And then, MS "pro-choice" looked at the woman. All Madame "pro-life" could do was bleat, "This is different."

toodles
......\
.he who is known as sefton

APPENDIX -

Here's some help for those visitors, who'd like to let others read this piece. Just underneath this piece, there's an envelope icon. Clicking on it brings up a page that facilitates e.mailing the hyperlink to this article.

One colleague blogger expressed an interest in linking to my blog. It's a nice thought. Unless the blog, to which one wishes to link, is BOTH extremely popular and elaborate, neither of which adjectives describes mine, such a link would be a waste of code.

Nonetheless, bloggers can help their readers link to this piece easily enough. One needs only copy the U.R.L in the address field that's specific to this article on its own page, and then paste it in an article that mentions this article.

Incidentally, I welcome bookmarking my blog.



EPIMETHEAN COMMENT -

In this case, my dear Senator, there's no need to look about discreetly. Here's what I'm hoping for, in my heart of hearts. I would love to hear one of your Senate colleagues ... supposedly, you're one of the senators, who is free of the Abramoff taint ... or even you (!) deliver the following speech.

"Judge Alito, I will vote to disapprove of your nomination to the Supreme Court of the United States. Truth be told, my dear Judge, my disapproval emerges not so much out of my consideration of your personal character, or even professional qualifications. Rather, it emerges from my distaste for your sponsorship.

"According to certain mainstays of your sponsorship, you are the culmination of some thirty (30) years of effort. Supposedly, yours will be the deciding vote on the Supreme Court to overturn Roe v Wade. Undoubtedly, that would be momentous.

In private with my thoughts and after ruthless deliberation, I've arrived at the inferences that can be drawn from the phrase "thirty (30) years". By biblical reckoning, that amounts to a generation and a half. If the Old Testament should be considered as a guide for decision making, then we should remember certain passages from EXODUS.

"Therein, we read that the generation that came out of Egypt was not allowed by the Lord God to enter Egypt because of impurity. It took some forty (40) years to purify the Lord God's Chosen People that they may enter their Promised Land.

"In thirty (30) years, much can change. When your sponsors embarked on their project, this United States of America harbored one set of sensibilities with regard to reproductive rights and presidential powers. Since then, much has changed.

"In as much as your sponsorship is thirty years behind the times, my dear Judge Alito, so too are you. This leads to other inferences.

"The fact that this United States of America has gradually transmuted the sensibilities, harbored within, leads to another inference ... in fact, a startling inference. Ours is a living country, which is governed by human beings in reverential compliance with our Constitution. Only a living Constitution is compatible with a living country. On the other hand, a 'dead' Constitution is manifestly incompatible with a living United States of America.

"It may well be that your sponsors are completely oblivious to the foregoing. That would be unfortunate. The reason being, that makes them far more pernicious, as they strive to achieve their goals. Were they to ultimately succeed ... and this goes beyond your mere ascension to the Supreme Court ... this living country would come under the sovereignty of a 'dead' Constitution.

"One of our Founding Fathers once remarked about the Huns and Vandals, who could destroy their nation, along with its destiny. Those Huns and Vandals will not invade from without. No, instead, they will attain seats of power and glory and honor. Thus ensconced, those Huns and Vandals will demolish the very foundation of our beloved country, and thus bring about its utter collapse.

"If I may, I should like to refer to Holy Writ again. The Saviour once remarked that "by their fruits, ye shall know them". Through the acquiescence in, if not outright complicity in these scandals, by your sponsorship, our nation's legislature is immersed in scandal. The ferocity ,with which your sponsorship, seeks your ascension to our Supreme Court gives me pause. That leads me to infer that your sponsorship has convincing reason to put their hopes in you.

"And that is another cause for my voting against your ascension to the Supreme Court of this United States of America. For our country's sake, those hopes must be dashed.

"It may well be, my dear Judge Alito, that you as an individual are an honorable man, that you as a professional jurist among other professional jurists are qualified to sit on that court. Nonetheless, your sponsorship makes your nomination to the Supreme Court tantamount to treason.

"And that is not all, I have to say. As I vote to deny your nomination the consent of this Senate, I believe I shall be doing so in the spirit of our Founding Fathers. When they embarked on the birth of their new nation, they pledged their life, their fortune, and their sacred honor. To the end that the hopes of your sponsorship shall be dashed, I pledge my life, my fortune, though a meagre legacy, and my sacred honor."