The online magazine Slate features an article celebrating Obama's new standard for selecting Supreme Court justices: finding nominees who have "empathy." Obama nominees must be able to "feel" their way through the cases that come before the highest court in our country.
The article castigates Republicans for conducting a "war on empathy";supposedly, Republicans are running around with "flaming torches" and "raised fists," loudly denouncing empathy. Actually, I'm not at all surprised that liberals are more concerned that Supreme Court justices show "feelings",rather than uphold the Constitution. Nor am I surprised that Drive-By journalists don't see a difference between the Supreme Court and the Oprah show.
But it is curious to see who are the recipients of Democrats' empathy. Democrats see it as their mission to destroy the lives and careers of Bush appointeeswho devoted themselves to protecting this country after the 9/11 attacks. At the same time, Democrats shower captured terrorists with "empathy"and demand their release.
But let's see how just how far liberal empathy extends. How about this for a litmus test on "empathy"? When a new Supreme Court justice is nominated,I challenge just one Judiciary Committee Democrat to ask the nominee: "Do you have as much empathy for an unborn child facing abortionas you do for an animal on the endangered species list?"
It's patheticwhat engenders empathy from liberals...and what doesn't.