No Minister

Bang that drum, Bomber

with 4 comments

Over at The Daily Blog, Martyn “Bomber” Bradbury has being going apeshit on the abortion issue since SCOTUS dropped its ruling that booted both the Roe (’73) and Casey (’92) decisions, throwing the law on abortions back to the fifty US states to decide.

What issue you may ask? That’s the US. This is New Zealand. True, but by my count “Bomber” has now written something like half-a-dozen posts trying to link the decision to the National Party here and in particular to the Great Christian Ogre that apparently is National leader Chris Luxon.

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

Dear oh dear, oh dear. Those polls showing the slow deflation of the Jacinda balloon and her Party must be keeping Bradbury awake every night, as well as the ongoing collapse of our healthcare, education, social welfare and law and order systems that promises more fail and even lower polls leading up to the next election. 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

As even some of his Lefty commentators have tried to explain to him – repeatedly – those problem areas are too big to ignore or deflect from, not to mention that Luxon strikes much of the right wing as a Wet, Woke drip who has already dumped his Christianity in the box marked “personal” and who will be silently “opposed” to whatever other Culture War crap the Left decide to pull in NZ from here on (“the National Party does not do culture wars”.)

However, “Bomber” is not listening: drowning men usually don’t, as witnessed by him refusing to publish my cheerful and erudite comments on his posts. 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

Aside from the desperate stupidity of his ploy there’s also the usual amount of hysterical garbage and double standards. The following has become a favourite over at TDB:

“THEY LIED”, scream the left, both here and in the USA, as they lambast the four latest GOP-nominated justices to get on the Supreme’s bench.

There’s a couple of problems with that, starting with the fact that if Supreme Court decisions were buried in the aspic of precedent and stare decisis, then terrible rulings like Plessy v. Ferguson (segregation), or merely legally weak ones like Bowers v. Hardwick (gay sex), Baker v. Nelson (gay marriage), Wolf v. Colorado, and many others, would never have been reversed.

Originalists such as Justice Antonin Scalia argue that “Stare decisis is not usually a doctrine used in civil law systems, because it violates the principle that only the legislature may make law.”[62] Justice Scalia argues that America is a civil law nation, not a common law nation.

The second problem is the usual double standards of the Left, in this situation something called The Ginsburg Rules. These were crafted up in 1993 by none other than one Senator Joe Biden for the purpose of protecting Clinton’s SCOTUS nominee, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, from being questioned too closely about her radical past positions on various legal issues. There was also the Model Code of Judicial Conduct:

Canon 5 of the Model Code, among others, forbids judges or judicial candidates from indicating how they will rule on issues likely to come before the courts or making any statement that would create the appearance they are not impartial. This rule is critical to an independent judiciary. Justices must remain open-minded when an actual case comes before them. They must not even hint how they would rule.

It all worked like a charm:

Sen. Leahy asked about the religion clauses of the First Amendment. Ginsburg responded simply: “I prefer not to address a question like that.” Leahy pressed for her interpretation of Supreme Court precedent on the subject, but Ginsburg again demurred: “I would prefer to await a particular case.” 

Sen. Strom Thurmond asked whether Ginsburg thought states could “experiment with and provide for diverse educational environments aided by public funding.” Ginsburg refused to give an answer: “Sen. Thurmond, that is the kind of question that a judge cannot answer at-large.” 

Ginsburg refused two senators’ requests to address homosexual rights. “[A]nything I say could be taken as a hint or a forecast on how I would treat a classification that is going to be in question before a court.” In fact, she exercised the Rule to avoid answering any questions relating to sexual orientation: “I cannot say one word on that subject that would not violate what I said had to be my rule about no hints, no forecasts, no previews.”

All bullshit of course. As with the recent conservative justices everybody knew damned well how Ginsburg was going to rule on such issues, that was why she was selected in the first place. To be fair to her it would have been interesting to ask what she thought of Roe since she (later) went on record about how legally weak it was. Still, she would never have overturned Roe or Casey, which was the point for the US Left.

No, Trump’s nominees did not lie, they merely followed the precedent of Ginsburg and Canon 5.

BTW, that article is dealing with the Robert’s nomination in 2005, by which time several Democrat Senators had stated that they weren’t going to follow the Ginsburg Rules or Canon 5 when it came to GOP nominated Justices.

I know. I’m shocked to learn that too! This is my shocked face.

Keep banging that drum “Bomber”.

Written by Tom Hunter

June 30, 2022 at 11:29 am

4 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Tom, please. The National Party doesn’t do culture wars. Those are talisman irrelevancies reserved solely for American politics.

    This is why partial-birth (and eventual post-birth) abortion, rainbow degeneracy and genital mutilation of children with “gender dysphoria” are centrist positions now.

    But Key/English balanced the books once, apparently, so everything’s cool . . .

    Porky Roebuck

    June 30, 2022 at 2:57 pm

  2. Some perspective on The Handmaid’s Tale (if Bomber ventures this way)

    Lucia Maria

    June 30, 2022 at 3:46 pm

    • Wow. She doesn’t look very happy, but not showing her face is probably part of the photo shop plan. Wouldn’t want to take away our focus from the real point of this shoot.

      I’m sensing a Matrix moment.

      We can’t be that far away from an artificial womb.

      Tom Hunter

      June 30, 2022 at 3:53 pm

  3. I’m just highly amused that Bradbury would be this desperate. I know he’s been around politics a long time and should know better, and it’s not like he hasn’t hammered Labour for their various failures.

    I can only guess that it’s just simple, bloody-minded tribalism. He knows Labour are shit across the board and especially in the areas they always claim they’re better than National (health, education, social welfare, housing) simply because they believe, like him, that more government control and more state spending will work.

    But he also “knows” that National are not quite as fanatical on both fronts and that an election loss is approaching so there’s nothing left to do but throw as much hysterical shit against the Nats (and ACT to a lesser degree) as possible and hope it sticks.

    I said the other day that Luxon is adopting the “small target” approach that Aussie leader John Hewson did in 1996.

    But that came after he lost the unloseable election of 1993 where Keating went totally negative and did nothing but throw shit – and that’s Bradbury’s approach in the same situation.

    Tom Hunter

    June 30, 2022 at 4:22 pm


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: