Day By Day© by Chris Muir.

Tuesday, September 27, 2005

DiFi -- a mind is a terrible thing to waste, Part II

I commented before on how the Roberts' hearings revealed that Dianne Feinstein, who was once a tough, pragmatic policitican, has devolved into a squirmy little mass of liberal feel-goodism. Although George Will does not comment on the strength she once possessed, he does an incredibly good job of showcasing everything that's ignorant and wrong with her (and by extension, the Democrats') approach to John Roberts and the Supreme Court. You'll want to read the whole thing, but I leave you this George Will prose to enjoy for now:

Exploring Roberts' "temperament and values," Feinstein asked him about "end of life" decisions, urging him to talk to her "as a son, a husband, a father." Instead, she says disapprovingly, he "gave a very detached response." Now, some people might think that detachment is a good thing in a judge -- that it might be the virtue called judiciousness. Never mind. Feinstein's real worry is, she said, Roberts' failure to explain how he planned to be "in touch" with "the problems real people have out there." She was dismayed by the inadequacy of his discussion of "the importance of reaching out to communities that he normally would not be in contact with, and spending time to understand the problems that average people face, in my communities of Hunters Point, of East L.A., of some of the agriculture areas of our state." Feinstein said, "His answer failed to recognize the point of the question and the concern about staying in touch with people who have different life experiences." Well, what was the point of the question? At the risk of revealing a serious empathy deficit, one might ask: What is the importance of a Supreme Court justice understanding the problems of lettuce farmers in California's Central Valley? How, in the course of performing his judicial duties, does a justice reach out to, and stay in touch with, those farmers? Perhaps justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer, two of Feinstein's pin-ups, routinely do the empathetic things that Roberts, Feinstein has decided, does not know how to do, or is too emotionally impoverished to do. But how does any of what Feinstein was talking about pertain to judging?
In other words, Will makes us realize that judges are not politicians, preachers or therapists, a distinction lost on the Left.