Reinventing Justice

Roger Kimball takes a look at the Obama administration's ongoing attempts to transform the Department of Justice into the Ministry of Social Engineering.

[W]hat we are seeing unfold in the Department of Justice is another facet of Obama’s spread-the-wealth-around, egalitarian, anti-American ideology. We just caught a glimpse of what that means with the Skip Gates/Sgt. Crowley case: the so-called post-racial presidency turned out to be the post-post-racial presidency. So it is at Justice: Eric Holder said that that he would run a Department of Justice "untainted by partisanship." Turns out, though, that that was verbal watercress for the punters. Really, he’s part of the most politicized and left-wing administration in U.S. history. The question is: how long will the American people put up with it?

Let's review Obama's accomplishments to date:

People he's insulted or demeaned: doctors, industrialists, Israel, policemen, entrepreneurs, the entire rural population of the United States, soldiers, the Queen of England, the elderly, and veterans. (The last two are often concomitant and comprise a singularly powerful voting block.)

People who still like him: liberal journalists, Muslim apologists, welfare recipients, academics, race-baiters, communist despots, students, and social activists. (Again, the last two on the list have a large overlap. In this case, however, they comprise an historically loud but non-participatory group in the election process.)

Judging by the results so far, I'd say congratulations are in order for Jimmy Carter; he's pretty clearly been overtaken as the least competent President in U.S. history.

Keep it up, Barry. You're doing everything I could hope to insure there won't be another socialist President in my lifetime. It's like watching a ship sink: you know how it's going to end, but there's something fascinating about observing slow-motion destruction on such a grand scale. I just hope we don't get sucked down by the ensuing vortex.

___


Grammatical segue: I had a debate with myself about whether "an historical" or "a historical" was the proper usage. Employing the suprainformational awesomeness that is the intarwebz, I found this rather extensive article on the subject. It should go without saying that what lies behind the link is only for the most hardcore of etymology geeks, of which proud and nit-picking club I am quite obviously a member.