Why Do Republicans Hate Involved Citizens

It is game time again, and this time, our team is home. The GOP's attacks on President Obama's supreme court nominee were obvious well before a name was chosen. BLANK is an activist judge. BLANK believes in rewriting the constitution. BLANK will legislate from the bench.

Let's discuss this term, "activist." The Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines it as:

a doctrine or practice that emphasizes direct vigorous action especially in support of or opposition to one side of a controversial issue

Dictionary.com defines it as:

–noun

1.	an especially active, vigorous advocate of a cause, esp. a political cause.

–adjective

2.	of or pertaining to activism or activists: an activist organization for environmental concern.

3.	advocating or opposing a cause or issue vigorously, esp. a political cause: Activist opponents of the President picketed the White House.

So, an activist, is anyone that believes strongly in an issue and actually gets off their ass to do something to make real the change they want to see in the world. Sounds horrible. How dare President Obama nominate someone who actually had the nerve to be an involved citizen!

Wait a minute... Should we be discouraging civic involvement? Should we be sending the message to our youths that they should think twice before getting involved in their community? GOP, please listen up for a second. If you would like to attack her, attack the issues she was active on, not the fact that she was active. Being an activist is the oldest American tradition. It is supposed to be a positive thing. Our founding fathers were activists and community organizers. So please spare me the shit.

Why is it, that the Republicans would want a disengaged public? Do they? I mean, they loved the "grassroots" (google "astro-turf organizing") teabaggers, didn't they? It is not that they are against, or in support of, real activists. They really do not care. All they care about is winning the argument. When their people are in the streets, yelling at the President, that is patriotism. When our side is in the streets, yelling at the President, we should move to Europe.

Now, on to legislating from the bench. Every progressive should know this one fact.

But a 2005 study by Yale University law professor Paul Gewirtz and Yale Law School graduate Chad Golder showed that among Supreme Court justices at that time, those most frequently labeled "conservative" were among the most frequent practitioners of at least one brand of judicial activism -- the tendency to strike down statutes passed by Congress. Those most frequently labeled "liberal" were the least likely to strike down statutes passed by Congress.

What is the definition of legislating from the bench if it is not ruling in opposition to the legislature? The point is, the GOP does not actually give a shit about "legislating from the bench." They just absolutely hate any ruling that would be considered progressive, or, gasp, liberal. To the GOP, a progressive ruling is legislating from the bench.

So, how about we take these attacks for what they are, shallow, unsubstantiated, insincere, and so on, and so on....