Notre Dame’s Bad Example . . . How Can A Politician Be Expected To Follow What He Swore To Do?
By DEXTER DUGGAN
The difficulty of holding political candidates to honor their promises was illustrated dramatically in an oblique way when even a nationally prominent priest once again violated his sworn fidelity to the fundamental moral teaching of his Roman Catholic Church.
If Fr. John Jenkins, CSC, president of the University of Notre Dame, thinks he can laud defiant renegade Catholic Joe Biden as an exemplary member of the Church, what would prevent any politician seeking votes from lying about what he’d be loyal to?
Already having deeply honored the recently elected radical pro-abortion President Barack Obama in 2009 at the South Bend Catholic institution, Jenkins decided this year to confer the Laetare Medal, considered the most prestigious medal for U.S. Catholics, on veteran political sellout Biden, Obama’s vice president, in May.
Liberal Democrat Biden’s fervor for promoting massive permissive abortion of defenseless infants, disoriented “same-sex marriage,” compulsory violation of religious conscience, and other assaults on traditional basic morality make him a huckster for deadly sin — hardly a model Catholic, worthy of emulation.
Might the upcoming impressive medal be a stealthily contrived publicity boost for Biden in light of political chatter that Democratic Party insiders would like to rewrite their party’s convention rules to make Biden the Democrat presidential nominee this summer instead of the appalling Hillary Clinton?
Biden is to receive the Notre Dame medal at the school’s May commencement ceremony, along with the putatively pro-life Republican John Boehner, another Catholic and failed former speaker of the U.S. House, who was more adept at fulfilling Obama’s degenerate agenda than standing up for the nation’s historic moral code.
While Boehner was a passive defender of traditional morality, Biden is an aggressive enemy of it.
LifeNews.com recalled on March 8 that Africa’s Francis Cardinal Arinze in 2011 strongly had condemned politicians who proclaim to be “pro-choice.” Arinze said during a conference at Virginia’s Christendom College, a faithful Catholic institution:
“Some people say, ‘I am personally opposed to abortion, but I will not impose my view on others.’ It is like saying, ‘Some people want to shoot all of you in the Senate and the House of Representatives, but I won’t impose my views on them. It’s pro-choice for them’.”
Some pointed political commentary these days looks at what 2017 might bring with a new Republican president in the White House, including his possible Supreme Court nominations. However, the chief executive likely would need a spine of steel to resist the many interests and influences tugging at him over one of the most powerful appointments he’d make.
The Supreme Court didn’t used to be this consequential, but its assertions of increasing power, such that it can shake and undermine the nation from coast to coast, effectively are unchallenged.
Someone like candidate Donald Trump could insist all he pleases that he’d be pro-life in making court appointments, but the word might not match the deed.
Shortly after he entered the White House in 1981, no less than President Ronald Reagan swiftly betrayed his pro-life supporters. That year he named Arizona appellate court judge Sandra O’Connor, a pro-abortionist, as his first Supreme Court appointment.
The Reagan administration shoved through her Senate confirmation and didn’t want to hear any criticism of O’Connor from the Arizonans acquainted with her pro-abortion record and reputation.
It remained a public mystery how the relatively obscure O’Connor came to his attention. One theory was that quietly pro-abortion Nancy Reagan, who often visited Phoenix, got O’Connor’s name from an acquaintance or two there.
Although Reagan went on to name stellar conservative Antonin Scalia to the High Court in 1986, the president also caved to Democrat pressure and nominated the swing-voting Anthony Kennedy in 1987.
Reagan’s successor, Republican President George H.W. Bush, put left-wing David Souter and conservative Clarence Thomas on the High Court. Bush’s successor, Democrat Bill Clinton, put two strongly left-wing justices on the court, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer.
Clinton’s successor, Republican George W. Bush, named John Roberts, who turned out to be a swing-voting disappointment, and, after failing to get surprising crony Harriet Miers a spot on the court, Bush turned to principled conservative Samuel Alito.
When conservatives rebelled at Miers’ nomination, one suggestion made in her defense was that Bush’s White House was pressured by time to come up with some name — as if the key prize of a lifetime High Court position hadn’t already been carefully thought out.
Barack Obama put two strongly left-wing justices on the court, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan. Another Obama left-winger, Merrick Garland, had his possible confirmation in this national election year put on hold by nervous Senate Republicans, who perhaps sensed how alienated voters were by this Supreme Court pattern:
Republican presidents may or may not put conservatives on the court, but Democrat presidents always name strong left-wingers. Also, GOP senators may or may not vote to confirm Democrat presidents’ known liberal nominees, but Democrat senators fight with a fury against any GOP nominee they fear to be conservative.
The Wanderer asked Arizona conservative Republican campaign consultant Constantin Querard what voters can do to try to ensure whatever candidate they pick will make conservative appointments.
“You won’t know for certain who picks the best judges until long after the fact, so vote for the candidate who you have the most faith in to pick the most conservative judges,” Querard replied. “Which candidate loves the Constitution and understands the court’s role in the process? Who is most likely to pick judges who will not legislate from the bench?
“At the end of the day, voters can really only make their most educated guess, because no one knows for sure until 10 years later,” he added.
Moral Decline
Rob Haney, a conservative retired chairman of the Maricopa County Republican Party, headquartered in Phoenix, replied to the same question from The Wanderer.
“Twelve of the last 16 Supreme Court nominations have been made by Republican presidents. O’Connor, Kennedy, Roberts, and Souter have been abysmal failures as far as meeting performance expectations are concerned,” Haney said in a March 25 email.
“The decline in the rule of law and the moral decline of the country in the last 30 years can in large part be attributed to these justices.
“The court’s rulings on abortion, the homosexual agenda, Obamacare, the failure to uphold state’s rights, and to stop the overreach by the president are but a few examples of the court’s taking to the low road,” he added. “The problem is that Democrat presidents are far-left ideologues, and Republican presidents are not far-right ideologues.
“As a consequence, Republican nominees are not properly vetted, and the Republican president is willing to settle for something less than a true conservative. We will only get a true conservative nominee through the election of a truly conservative president. That outcome appears unlikely,” Haney said.
Some people think Obama’s damage to the United States results from inexperience and blunders. However, Haney thinks it’s intentional.
“I have come to expect a coarsening of our culture and a decline in American exceptionalism from anything Obama and his administration are part of. I do not believe Obama could be this incompetent,” Haney said.
“He promised that he would fundamentally change America. His purpose is clear. He is working for the demise of the United States. My only question is whose agent is he? There are several possibilities.”
Haney didn’t list those possibilities.
When the elite’s agenda is so much at odds with the public’s — from massive abortion to massive illegal immigration, open borders, and presidential lawlessness — the elite strategy seems to be to dig in hard and hold on tight until the public’s back is broken, no matter how long the battle takes.
