The other 'n' word
Perhaps I was mistaken the other day when I implied that Senator Harry Reid's comments claiming that Justice Clarence Thomas' opinions were poorly written constituted a subtle form of racism. Perhaps he was willing to risk such charges - lose the battle, as it were, in order to win the war. If that's the case, I may have violated the cardinal rule of military (and political) strategy - never underestimate your opponent.
I am beginning to believe that Senator Reid was willing to do whatever necessary to discredit Justice Thomas, even taking the risk of being labeled a racist. While I still believe that having the President elevate Justice Thomas to Chief Justice would be a blow from the racial aspect, I also believe that Senator Reid and his ilk are more concerned with another threat, one that could lead to the death of modern liberalism.
What is this threat to liberalism that has the Senate Minority leader willing to risk a politically devastating label such as 'racist'? Well, it has to do with Justice Thomas daring to invoke the other 'n' word - 'Natural Law'. As Tom Krannawitter of the Claremont Institute has so deftly pointed out, Senator Reid is willing to accept the strict constructionism of Justice Antonin Scalia over the natural law jurisprudence of Justice Thomas because it seems inevitable that one of the two will be elevated - and the Senate Minority leader and his cohorts have decided that it's better to lose an election or two and live to fight another day than to lose liberalism itself.
Mr Krannawitter's last line says it all:
Conservatives should unite behind Justice Thomas and defend his natural-law jurisprudence because nothing less will resuscitate the Constitution they hope to save.
