Conservative arguments literally hurt my head.
The illogical doublethink, misleading euphemisms, and stark refusal to face what they're actually thinking is FUCKING APPALLING.
And I seek them out. I subject myself to them just to be able to pick them apart. Am I the real fool here?
I'm thinking this in particular as regards this "strict constructionism" fucking NONSENSE. It has no solid definition, it means nothing, there's no declared way to suggest it means anything. It's some phrase that's emerged from the deep swamps of Conservative thinking, it means something to them, but can we really know?
I'm trying to find out. I'm on a little tiny nowhere blog, and they refuse to answer any hypothetical questions. It's like they're getting microwave transmissions into their Bush pins like the Baptist Church of Borg. "Stay...on...message. Repeat: Strict...constructionism. Roe v. Wade...isn't-important-to-us."
Thank God for Media Matters, for at least clarifying that I'm not insane:
http://mediamatters.org/items/200507200006
In the weeks leading up to Bush's July 19 nomination, news outlets repeated Bush's claim that he wants to nominate a "strict constructionist" to the Supreme Court -- which he defines as someone "who will strictly interpret the Constitution and not use the bench to legislate from."
Some media outlets, such as The Washington Post and NBC's Today, echoed conservatives' characterization of a strict constructionist as the opposite of a judicial activist, a judge who legislates from the bench.
But in characterizing Roberts as a "strict constructionist," conservatives have not provided a substantive definition of the term, nor provided a justification for their suggestion that he is the opposite of a judicial activist.
It's like that "Dred Scott decision" head-fuckery the GOPservatives try to pull. At least I got the info on that, after a while. It's a coded tacit equating of abortion with slavery. FUCKERS! SLAVES WERE ALREADY BORN! FETUSES ARE TISSUE!!! Kee-rist....
Whatever the hell 'strict constructionism' means to them, it certainly means something entirely different to liberals. But they're trying to frame us and paint us, such that if we're against Roberts it must be because we hate the Constitution, e.g. why do we hate America?? So, look out.
To get a handle on this, we'll have to sit here in the dark trenches below the battlefield of logic, and try to find exactly what the fuck they're talking about - and more importantly what they're *not* talking about.
And if it turns out to be smoke behind mirrors behind a dark robe underneath a dead body somewhere in Alaska when the last train has already left and my second cousin turns out to be a shape-shifting were-rabbit - in other words, a head-hurting walkabout through murky wilderness - well, that's the way we gotta roll.
sigh....
Update [2005-7-21 20:13:35 by jbeach]: I just found out I've been saying "strict constitutionalism" all day, when the brain-melting logic-disassociator phrase is actually "strict constructionism".
&*@%#$%$.