If one listens carefully, one can hear the sounds of conservatives hearts breaking all over the lower 48.
Gov. Sarah Palin on Wednesday picked a former board member of Planned Parenthood to fill the latest vacancy on the Alaska Supreme Court despite efforts by a conservative Christian group to convince her to do otherwise.
Heartache?
Now, before you write off Palin completely there are some extenuating circumstances. You should know the way the process in Alaska goes. A liberal board (made up of leftist trial lawyer types) nominates two people and the Governor has to pick one. And from what I understand, neither option was great but of the two, it would appear that Palin may have picked the more liberal of the two, at least according to Alaska Family Council’s Jim Minnery. Minnery wrote Palin in support of the other candidate, Judge Eric Smith saying Smith was “more conservative” and that Christen would be “another activist on the Court.”
This would not seem to be good news for those who love Sarah. There’s one thing conservatives take seriously – and that’s judges.
I hope this wasn’t some calculated move by Sarah Palin to show that she’s not an extremist. But either way, I believe many people are not going to be happy.
Some people who clearly are happy, however are liberal bloggers. According to the Alaska Standard the liberal bloggers there are esctatic.
“Ohmigawd!??The governor’s been taken over by space aliens.??What an improvement!”
“Wow. Way to go Palin! I can’t believe I just said that. But hey, credit where credit is due.”
“Glad to see a woman in the position to balance out the court. Good for Palin for keeping bible thumper beliefs out of the court system and honoring the separation of Church and State.”
“This is the one good action that Sarah Palin has taken over the past three years. And I have no problem admitting it. Great pick!!!! So even if the wing-nut parental consent bill passes, the state Supremes now have enough votes to overturn it as unconstitutional.”
The fact that the liberals are so excited is likely a bad sign.
Years ago, then Governor Murkowski refused to appoint any of the names given to him but caved after the liberal media jumped ugly on him. Likely, Palin didn’t want to make this her fight as it would’ve surely become a national spectacle.
In short, this smells like political calculation by Sarah. And it’s one I don’t think pro-life conservatives are going to forget.
One can almost imagine the one person who is happily reading this news today – Mike Huckabee.
Some updates can be found at Conservatives 4 Palin.
Thanks to Matt Swaim for alerting me to the story.
March 6, 2009 at 7:31 pm
While I recognize neither choice was ideal, Mrs. Palin, if she was considering a run for President in 2012, should have made an issue out of this. She did not, which supports my belief that she is more Libertarian than anything else. This will not sit well with the Pro Life crowd.
March 6, 2009 at 8:21 pm
For Palin, I think this was one of them.
And what exactly was she supposed to do? Disband the independent panel and just appoint whoever she wanted?
March 6, 2009 at 8:52 pm
I’m not dead. The babies are dead. Babies trump the politics of convenience every time.
March 6, 2009 at 8:59 pm
Paul,
Yes. Some things are worth going to the mattresses over. Abortion is one of them.
March 6, 2009 at 9:22 pm
Jim M – we happen to believe in a God who comes back from the dead and leaves His cave. 😉
Besides which, Ayn Rand can write what she wants in 1960; how then o explain Ronaldus Maximus as President from 1981-1988? Or the 1994 Congressional sweep-up? Neither lasted, but that wasn’t all that long ago. Such times may come again – and especially as people get an honest and open look at Little O’s Box o’ Marxism in action.
March 6, 2009 at 9:24 pm
Hi, nice to meet you. I’m a unicorn. No, sorry, I’m apparently rarer than a unicorn. Pro-ecology and pro-life. They aren’t necessarily different, you know. We’re not actually fantasy creatures and there’s more of us about than you realise. It is possible to have more than one idea in your head at the same time!
March 6, 2009 at 9:30 pm
Paul, yeah, that does sound a bit Charles-the-First-ey, doesn’t it?
archbold, nope. Abortion, much as I hate it, is not worth a constitutional crisis. If you think your pet issue is worth coronating a new “Queen Of The Frozen North”, there are plenty of monarchist sites for you to choose from; a personal fave of mine is unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com. But we’re small d democrats here. (I think.)
Palin was delivered a “brown sandwich” and in politics, unfortunately, sometimes you have to bite on one.
That said: Palin needs to make it a priority to change the Alaska Constitution, because it has clearly been hacked by partisan Leftists. The only recommendations an independent panel should be making are whether a candidate is competent to interpret the written law. If the panel is not doing it, then it’s no better than the Iranian Guardian Council and needs its charter rewritten.
March 6, 2009 at 10:36 pm
Matt:
Can you be more specific. What precisely would you have done if you were in Sarah Palin’s shoes? Should she have called out the Alaska National Guard and forced the board to make an appointment that was more in line with her preferred choice?
Sometimes the pro-life movement isn’t happy unless we’re eating our own. Frustration with Brownback was understandable. Anger with Palin because she refuses to circumvent the Alaska constitution is just pettiness for the sake of being petty.
March 7, 2009 at 1:02 am
Have it out. Try to change the system. Murkowski started but then wimped. Look, if the Courts rule against her then they rule against her.
But this would have been a fine time to challenge the sytem.
I’m not talking about her bringing out the National Guard. Just challenge it.
When Murkowski did it, I haven’t read anywhere about a “Constitutional crisis.”
March 7, 2009 at 1:11 am
I won’t say I’m happy to hear this, of course, but I am happy that this will hopefully hurt Palin’s chances at the Republican nomination. She is not qualified to be President. Period.
~cmpt
March 7, 2009 at 2:19 am
She is not qualified to be President. Period.
As opposed to the current occupant of the White House, who has done such a bang up job so far.
Please.
March 7, 2009 at 7:35 am
Paul Zummo,
Why are purposely trying be annoying?
~cmpt
March 7, 2009 at 8:21 am
I live in Alaska, and Judge Smith ruled very unfairly in a case I was involved in – choosing to automatically side with an abusive state agency – instead of doing what was fair and just. He refused to even let our attorney present evidence. It was cruel – but he took the easy path of least resistance – hoping instead to safeguard his career. I want conservative judges as much as anyone – but I for one am glad that he was not chosen. I contacted the Governors Office about this, and I’m likely not the only one. People get reputations. Perhaps she is taking more things into account than the public realizes – like ethics. I’d prefer an honest person with different opinions any day – than someone I knew was unjust – and would cave easily to pressure.
March 7, 2009 at 1:55 pm
I’m not trying to be annoying, I am trying to respond to ppl who are misrepresenting Palin’s actions, and to people like you who just ape the mainstream’s attitude’s about Paline’s credentials. But I guess if not simply agree with what you say is “annoying,” then you ought to be prepared to be annoyed a lot in life.
March 7, 2009 at 2:54 pm
Although I do apologize to Matt for excessive snark. I may disagree with him substantively on this point, I don’t have any problems with his passion. Sorry, Matt.
March 7, 2009 at 2:57 pm
Paul Zummo,
No, no, no… By “annoying,” I mean foolish things like putting words in my mouth, such as when you insinuate that because I said Palin in not qualified, that I have therefore endorsed the qualifications of Barack Obama. That is what I mean when I say “annoying,” and you know it. It is precisely that faux ignorance which you are presently feigning which is so annoying. You know that you are putting words in my mouth, and you know that is why I said you are annoying, and yet you persist. Don’t play stupid: people might fall for it.
~cmpt
March 7, 2009 at 3:15 pm
I sincerely don’t understand why you have such a crush on this woman, or why this is a shock to anyone. It is P-O-L-I-T-I-C-S.
If you are going to idealise someone to the point of nausea, at least pick a Catholic next time.
March 7, 2009 at 3:22 pm
Hahaha, here’s to that, Deusdonat! Here’s to true pro-life Catholics, not weird, amazingly incompetent Alaskan Protestants.
~cmpt
March 7, 2009 at 4:10 pm
CMPT – to be clear, I don’t find Sarah Palin to be amazingly incompetent. I think she has a decent track record as mayor of Wassila and Governor of Alaska. I just don’t find anything exemplary about her. And yes, she is slightly weird (but then again, so am I). And yes, the Protestant thing is a non-starter for me.
March 7, 2009 at 6:25 pm
If you are going to idealise someone to the point of nausea, at least pick a Catholic next time.
Speaking of putting words into people’s mouths, here is Deusdonat implying that I have a “crush” on this woman, or that my defense of her is because I “idealise” her in some way.
Whatever, people.