For the genius of the Constitution rests not in any static meaning it might have had in a world that is dead and gone, but in the adaptability of its great principles to cope with current problems and current needs.
~ Justice Wm. J. Brennan (1906-97)
It is impossible to fight against a revolution that wars against, that undermines, that incessantly seeks to destroy everything you hold most dear (e.g., God, family, country) when you don't even realize that you, your parents and your grandparents were born right in the middle of a vicious, perpetual war of ideas – Progressivism vs. Conservatism – which in my upcoming book I call, "The Progressive Revolution" (two volumes).
Did you know that every president of the United States from the first president of the 20th century, Theodore Roosevelt (1901-09), to our current president, Barack Hussein Obama (2009- ), was an admitted progressive, with the exception of three conservative Republicans: Warren Harding (1921-23), Calvin Coolidge (1923-29) and Ronald Reagan (1981-89)?
In 1956, William. J. Brennan (1906-97) was appointed to the U.S. Supreme Court by President Dwight D. Eisenhower, a progressive Republican and World War II hero, where Brennan severed for 34 years until 1990. His judicial nomination was only opposed by Sen. Joseph McCarthy, R-Wis. Brennan's prolific output of 1,360 opinions is second only to William O. Douglas in the sheer number written while a Supreme Court justice.
Justice Scalia considered Brennan perhaps the most influential justice of the 20th century. I would agree if by "influential" he meant evil, for the utterly diabolical consequences of Brennan's Supreme Court majority, concurring and minority opinions over almost three and a half decades has unleashed more evil intent upon American law, politics, culture and society than perhaps any other single justice. His colleagues nicknamed him the "deputy chief" because of his close friendship with Chief Justice Earl Warren (another progressive Republican appointee), who frequently assigned Brennan the task of writing the majority opinion.
He was known for his outspoken progressive views, including opposition to the death penalty and support for abortion rights, which virtually every law school dean and law professor holds as liberal legal orthodoxy and beyond all rational dispute; nevertheless, they can't see the hypocrisy of Brennan's activist jurisprudence that bends over backwards to protect the most irredeemable murderers, rapists and psychopaths. For example, in Glass v. Louisiana (1985), the Court chose not to hear a case that challenged the constitutionality of the use of the electric chair as a form of execution. In his dissent from denial of certiorari, Brennan, in page after page of sublime eloquence, agonized over the unjust pain murderers would suffer in the electric chair, writing:
Th[e] evidence suggests that death by electrical current is extremely violent and inflicts pain and indignities far beyond the "mere extinguishment of life." Witnesses routinely report that, when the switch is thrown, the condemned prisoner "cringes," "leaps," and "fights the straps with amazing strength." "The hands turn red, then white, and the cords of the neck stand out like steel bands." The prisoner's limbs, fingers, toes, and face are severely contorted. The force of the electrical current is so powerful that the prisoner's eyeballs sometimes pop out and "rest on [his] cheeks." The prisoner often defecates, urinates, and vomits blood and drool.
Brennan concluded his soliloquy with the claim that electrocution is "nothing less than the contemporary technological equivalent of burning people at the stake."
Yet this celebrated justice of the U.S. Supreme Court enthusiastically voted for the death penalty for over 53 million innocent little babies since the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion. I read the majority, concurring and dissenting opinions of Roe v. Wade, and I find not one word of mercy, not one syllable, sentence or paragraph of compassion for our most innocent and defenseless little babies from the prolific pen of Justice Brennan.
Justice Brennan's agreement with the majority opinion in Roe v. Wade has led to the premeditated murder of more babies in 39 years than the total current population of South Africa.
What gives progressive jurists like Brennan the constitutional right to systematically destroy the Constitution? He told us in his own words:
We current justices read the Constitution in the only way that we can: as 20th-century Americans. We look to the history of the time of framing and to the intervening history of interpretation. But the ultimate question must be, what do[es] the words of the text mean in our time? For the genius of the Constitution rests not in any static meaning it might have had in a world that is dead and gone, but in the adaptability of its great principles to cope with current problems and current needs.
Justice Brennan believes in the so-called Living Constitution doctrine originated by Woodrow Wilson over 100 years ago and integrated into public policy by FDR's "New Deal" and LBJ's "Great Society" programs, as well as by the majority of local, state and federal judges. Likewise, President Obama believes in the Living Constitution doctrine, which he learned at Harvard Law School from progressive/liberal icon professor Laurence Tribe, the doctrine's most zealous adherent in modern times.
For about 150 years, natural law served as the jurisprudence of all America's judges and constitutional framers from the founding of our republic (1789) to FDR's treasonous Court packing plan of 1937. The false and diabolical contentions contained in progressive's Living Constitution doctrine essentially eradicates America's original Judeo-Christian worldview, natural law and the original intent of the constitutional framers. It is based on the false premise that the opposite of the "Living Constitution" denotes a static, dead, non-responsive, non-historical Constitution (i.e., natural law), which is a gross mischaracterization of the history of American jurisprudence.
The rule of law means nothing to liberal, progressive and activist judges like Brennan and his progeny. All that matters to these egotistical, renegade judges is their own personal policy preferences and Nietzsche's "Will to Power," which as far back as the 1857 Dred Scott v. Sandford case
(the ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court that people of African descent, whether or not they were slaves, when brought into the United States and held as slaves, were not protected by the Constitution and could never be U.S. citizens), arrogantly substitutes liberal Democratic Party politics in place of the verity of the Constitution. This treachery has caused the collapse of the Constitution and the rule of law in American society and has turned the Supreme Court, originally the least powerful of the three branches of government, into a shameful, tyrannical oligarchy of five.