Nobody Knows Why the 'Rule of Law' Is Not Ruling

Nobody Knows: If all is fair in love and war, then where does the rule of law fit in?

If your enemy does not play by the Geneva Convention’s rule of torture, then why should you? If your wife had the remote control for two nights in a row, and wants to watch her favorite Seinfeld rerun tonight but you want to watch the hockey playoffs, do you plan to get sick when she wants to go visit her mother?

Was that last question unfair?

When Obama keeps mentioning the fact that he’s black, while at the same time he’s playing political ads on TV reminding everyone that he’s white, obviously playing it both ways--- BUT if anyone even mentions the word black around him they are called a racist…is that a fair rule?

And while we all try to drive on the right side of the street, and pay our taxes, is it fair that our government officials give themselves pay raises every year, while we only get more taxes?

Okay, I could go on forever like this. I know, life is unfair…get over it. But that’s exactly the point, most of us can’t. That’s why the “rule of law” is so important.

Right in front of me, under my monitor is a paper weight. It has a two-cent stamp with John Adams picture on it, and his famous phrase, “A government of laws and not of men.” Next to the famous line spouted by all victorious super-bowl quarterbacks, “I want to go to Disneyland!” I can’t think of any one ‘phrase’ more relevant to mankind.

In fact, because so many laws are completely ignored daily, mostly by our ruling politicians who ignore them, spin them, and change them to fit their agendas, Disneyland should be a mandatory yearly tax-paid vacation for all citizens due to the stress our politicians cause us.

Without laws, men would be tyrants. “So let it be written!”--- and so has it been written by so many famous thinkers in earth’s history that one could not even count them all in one day…and still, liberals continue to ignore history. History is whatever they “feel” is relevant to use for their argument at the time. It doesn’t apply to them, because if they have to become tyrants in order to “help” poor mankind, who can’t help itself, then so be it.

I was thinking this about the “rule of law” while watching Charlie Rose interview Supreme Court Justice, Antonin Scallia, last week.

Charlie Rose, it’s no secret, is a “progressive.” While he is a fabulous interviewer, when it came to interviewing Justice Scallia, in every question he was trying almost too hard to convince Antonin that his crazy habit of interpreting the Constitution literally was really not “intelligent.” Better men than Charlie Rose have tried to convince that bear that he should go hide somewhere and get out of the way, and let the rabbits take over. I felt a tinge of pity for Charlie.

So did Scallia, bless his heart.

To liberals, the Constitution was written by old white guys who didn’t know about cars, mercury filled light bulbs, aids, Gloria Steinem, global-warming, the ACLU, and dinner at the Adams-Mark. It’s outdated, and darn it, the only way to fix things is to get judges to decide what the “rule of law” should be. The “rule of law: like a floating butterfly, is a beautiful thing when in motion.

Scalia would argue it’s a judge’s job to interpret the law, not make it up. That’s what Kings do.

You look at the sun, and you say it’s the sun, it’s pretty simple.

But liberals are stuck on this philosophy of every law is “living and changing” even in the functioning of the “Al Gore” internet.

Remember, about ten years ago---you would type in a word and the search engine would give you the articles researched “scientifically”? Your hits were determined by how many times that word you typed appeared in the article, then list them in that context?

It was logical and fair, and brilliant.

I miss those days.

Then GOOGLE came along. Now the search is done by the “rule of men.” It’s Google and its employees who decide what information and articles they think are relevant to your search, and give you the “hits” they think you should see.

And they call it: progress.

How many judges in our recent history have thrown out laws voted on and pass by the majority of the people? Who punishes those judges for breaking the law? Nobody.

As Scalia would say…we need more Rule of Law, and a “Law of Rules”

And this nobody wishes we had a “refresh” button for “rule of law” instead of having tyrannical and powerful men in high positions with no fear of any laws.

It might not solve all mankind’s problems, but history has shown it’s a good start.

Having said that...you can always see the playoffs next year.