In this current atmosphere of Supreme Court rulings Run amok, I thought it would be appropriate to reflect on the wisdom of my hero, Ronald Reagan. I think it is pretty amazing that he said, on October 27, 1964,

“Private property rights are so diluted that public interest is almost anything that a few government planners decide it should be. In a program that takes for the needy and gives to the greedy,”

Wow! I Know Reagan consulted a psychic, or so the rumors say, but That is just some amazing accuracy. He could have said that yesterday, but he said it 41 years ago. It has finally come to fruition.

In the same speech, he could have been talking about the Democrat’s view of the War on Terror when he said,

“And they say if we only avoid any direct confrontation with the enemy, he will forget his evil ways and learn to love us.”

Geneva Convention protection for terrorists, anyone?

On March 25, 1978 he had already recognize the template from which our present anti-war debate would be forged:

“Too often, the president is advised by men and women who are forever trapped in the tragic but still fresh memory of a lost war. And from Vietnam they have drawn all the wrong lessons. When they say “never again,” they mean the United States should never again resist Communist aggression.

In saying “never again,” implying that the war should have been lost — that it is all right for the victors to conduct a brutal campaign against their own people, violating even minimal human rights.”

Again, This could be a response to any of the “sky is falling” claims of failure, or “quagmire” in the current war.

I just thought I would share some of these poignant thoughts from our late, great President, because they could have been said today, and been just as accurate.

Newsmax reports, Senate Democrats are requesting that President Bush get their approval for any upcoming Supreme Court nominee. “The way to avoid the divisiveness and discord that occurred over past judicial nominations is through consensus and cooperation in the selection of future candidates,” the Senate Democrats said in a letter sent to the White House on Thursday.

Senator Edward Kennedy (D) of Massachusetts said, “It doesn’t take much to get our consent. All the president has to do is seek out his preferred non-ideological choices, ask us about them, and listen to our answers.” White House press secretary Scott McClellan said that the White house has consulted, and will continue to consult with the Senate on nominations. “And I would expect if there were a Supreme Court nominee, the president would listen to members of the Senate, as well.” He then mumbled, “But not the Democrats.”

It is likely that Chief Justice William Rehnquist, 80, will retire soon. He is suffering from cancer. The President plans to select the “Best darn tootin’ judge” he can get “Uncle Teddy” to approve of.

No word yet on just how far left that requires a nominee to be, although a spokesperson for Sen. Kennedy’s office said, “(Karl) Marx was an ultra-conservative, right-winger, and a religious fanatic.” Marx is commonly thought of as a communist, and an atheist. This might not be a good sign for “the spirit of bi-partisanship” so often touted by the “progressive” Democratic Party.

DNC Chairman Howard “Mao-Tse” Dean said at a press conference today, “Do we really want this ultra right-wing court allowing the Ten Commandments on any type of property, public or otherwise. We need to stop these White Christian evangelicals,” referring to the Supreme Court ruling in which the court banned the display of the Ten Commandments in one case but decided it was just fine in another case.

CNN reports:

Dissenting in the Texas case, Justice John Paul Stevens argued the display was an improper government endorsement of religion. Stevens noted in large letters the monument proclaims ‘I AM the LORD thy God.’”

He also noted other preposterous notions in the Ten Commandments, such as, “You shall not commit adultery,” and “You shall not steal.”

Chairman Dean also stated that, “These are not the kinds of values we want reflected in our culture. How are we, as a people, to seize land when we put it out there on display that stealing is wrong? This Supreme Court is so far to the right, out of the mainstream, they must be stopped at all costs.”

He also added that the ruling on Kelo v. New London was evidence that, “the ultra-conservative Court is in the back pocket of corporations and land developers.”