I tossed my morning wheaties when I read this letter to the editor of the Roanoke Times from a "professor in the Department of Criminal Justice at Radford University," curiously entitled, "Obama could shape the Supreme Court" (which deserves a resounding duh):
"In the 1996, 2000 and 2004 elections, the court consisted of three conservative justices, four moderate justices and two swing votes -- Justices Anthony Kennedy and Sandra Day O'Connor."
A joke, right? He's got to be joking.
• There are nine justices total.
• We can all agree that two of them (Kennedy and O'Connor) were considered (more often than not) swing votes (which means both held firmly to legal opinions grounded in New York Times headlines).
• And Rehnquist, Scalia, and Thomas were/are certainly conservative.
• That's five.
• That leaves four.
So Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stevens, Souter, and Breyer were ... moderates?
In which planetary dimension?
But the learned professor, with his years of education and research behind him, says it's so:
The two oldest members now are Stevens (88) and Ruth Bader Ginsburg (75), members of the moderate bloc. Although David Souter (69 and another moderate) is three years younger than Antonin Scalia and ... [blah blah blah]Okay, I've read enough.
This professor is a nut.
Nobody this side of Neptune would put any of those three in the "moderate" bloc unless he was suffering from dementia or was harboring a liberal bias powerful enough to prevent an attachment to the realities of this world.
Ginsburg and Souter are moderates? Please. I'm eating my breakfast.