Saturday, July 12, 2003

Jonah Goldberg is an idiot.

But you knew that.

I was reading the conservative blogs for justifications for Bush's inclusion of questionable (and ultimately bad) information in his argument for war, and I come across Jonah Goldberg of The Corner's dismissal of Jesse of Pandagon's response to his criticism of O'Connor's decision in Lawrence v. Texas. Jesse, he says, doesn't "understand the difference between amending the constitution and making up what the constitution means." Of course, Jesse does. But even if he didn't, you may want to consider the source.

Goldberg criticized O'Connor because "O'Connor changes her mind all the time. Seventeen years ago, for example, she thought anti-sodomy laws were constitutional. Now she doesn't. And since the words on the constitutional parchment haven't changed, it's pretty clear that the woman behind the curtain is the real Wizard of Oz."

Now, I'm no lawyer, but I can read. O'Connor didn't join the majority opinion in Lawrence v. Texas; she wrote a concurring opinion. The first two sentences: "The Court today overrules Bowers v. Hardwick, 478 U. S. 186 (1986). I joined Bowers, and do not join the Court in overruling it." Think Goldberg got that far?

Probably not. So he certainly didn't get this far: "This case raises a different issue than Bowers: whether, under the Equal Protection Clause, moral disapproval is a legitimate state interest to justify by itself a statute that bans homosexual sodomy, but not heterosexual sodomy. It is not."

As Keynes said, "When the facts change, I change my opinion. What do you do?" Apparently, O'Connor shares Keynes' philosophy. Goldberg doesn't. Like most conservatives, when the facts change, he ignores the facts.

But you knew that.