Thread by @_Cheekymunkey

As the vote on Judge Kavanaugh comes around tomorrow I have thoughts I have gathered about what has really been at the root of this debacle.
First, this is NOT about C. Ford nor any other "accuser" of Judge K. This is not about women. This is not about abortion. I hate to

break it to everyone that Roe v Wade will not be overturned. The best/worse you can hope for (dependent on your perspective) is restriction or more clear definition of viability. (Viability has greatly changed w/ medical advances). This is NOT about his temperament or

some judicial bias. If that were so Dems would have started impeachment of RBG who has said much more inflammatory statements regarding President Trump.
I have said it and will say it again Dr. Ford was a convenient and willing sacrifice. She was in way over her head before

she knew what hit her. I do not allow this to excuse her. (don't get hung up on that not the point of this at all). Ok so what is all this craziness about? Now indulge me and let me point to two quotes from Judge K. "I believe very much in interpreting text as it is written

and not seeking to impose one’s own personal policy preferences into the text of the document. I believe very much in judicial restraint, recognizing the primary policymaking role of the legislative branch in our constitutional democracy." Read it again, take it in. Now one more.

“(S)ome of the worst moments in the Supreme Court’s history have been moments of judicial activism, like the Dred Scott case, like the Lochner case, where the court went outside its proper bounds, in my judgment, in interpreting clauses of the Constitution to impose

impose its own policy views and to supplant the proper role of the legislative branch.”
Ok I want to emphasize he does not expect the Court to be a sort of politically immune super-legislative branch.
THIS IS IT. This is what all the hoopla is about in all reality. Judicial

activism. The turn away from the (L)iberal, judicially active Court will end several things democrats (and some republicans) have grown accustomed to and frankly love. The Court has been "legislating with immunity" with life appointments. If this ends then the onus will be on not

only on Congress/Senate to legislate and be held accountable by voters, but also this will apply to State legislatures. A Supreme Court acting within its bounds will mean that our elected officials will have to do their jobs and put it on paper/vote record, all which can be held

up to voters. It will also stem the tsunami of lower courts (9th circuit best example) legislating from the bench. Now why does this make any difference? Well its how the founding father's intended the Court to function. Judicial activism has meant legislators have stopped

being accountable because they really do nothing, and when they do write legislation it is weak as pablum counting on the courts to define it. Its called accountability. This would upset the modern apple cart so to speak. So this is my attempt at sectioning out the thoughtful

objection. This is the deep fear.
Do I believe this is the motivation of all.....heck no. Never doubt a great many of the Senators are just playing to their masters and love the screeching mob and chaos. But this shift in judicial philosophy is in fact the fear of their MASTERS.