Wow.  Another Bush era official (I love calling it an era.  Even though it’s less than 120 days or whatnot, it still feels like it was another time like… before man invented fire.  Or Books) has come out of his hole to try to shape the debate.

The good news for Democrats is, just like Cheney, it’s another unlikable player that didn’t play well with power.

Ladies and gentlemen, give it up for Alberto Gonzales!

From THIS SITE

Following Supreme Court Justice David Souter’s announcement that he planned to retire, conservatives have attacked and mocked President Obama’s statement that he is seeking a replacement who has “empathy” for “the daily realities of people’s lives.” “I’ll give you empathy. Empathize right on your behind!” bellowed RNC Chairman Michael Steele last Friday.

Now, former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales is getting in on the act. Appearing on NPR’s Tell Me More yesterday, Gonzales claimed that he is “worried” that judges with empathy would make “decisions based on what they think makes them feel good”:

GONZALES: I do worry a little bit, well, I worry, I worry about about justices on the court making decisions based on what they think makes them feel good. I don’t think it’s fair to expect society to anticipate the outcome of a case based upon what makes a justice feel good. In essence what you’re saying, I think, is that I’m going to, I don’t care what the law says, I’m going to come out, I’m going to pursue an outcome that I think is fair and just. I’m going to rewrite the law. And I think that’s dangerous.

First, let me once again point out what a sparkling bottle of class Michael Steele is.  I guess all the birthday clowns were booked when it was time to pick a new GOP leader but the good news is… this guy is HILARIOUS.

On to this:  I really don’t care at all what Gonzales thinks is dangerous.  He didn’t think when he had the job – he just did what he was told like a good little foot soldier.   Speaking of feet – doesn’t he have a boot to lick down in Crawford?  Why is this guy back?

Still –  here we have it again – more of this ridiculous word parsing that started with “Community Organizer,” moved to  ”Spread the wealth” and continues here.   “Empathy” is now a bad thing.

Yes, God forbid a judge living in the 2009 balance real world experience into the interpretation of the constitutional law.  That doesn’t mean THROWING THE CONSTITUTION OUT.     

If it doesn’t matter that the judge be “empathetic” to the world he or she lives in, you might as well have Ted Stevens in there screaming “NO!!!” and calling the internet a series of tubes.  Or  John Roberts, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, who in every major case has ALWAYS SIDED WITH THE PROSECUTION.

“Always” is never a good thing.  ”Always” means you’re not judging – you’ve already judged.   

What this is really about is that a Democrat is about to put a Justice on the Supreme Court.  And that someone will – I know this sounds shocking – more than likely lean to the left.  

Again, when the Democrats won, choosing a Supreme Court justice became something the Democrats get to do.  And if it sounds like I’m talking about this like I’m speaking to a nine-year old, well, there’s a reason. 

Just because you don’t like something doesn’t mean it’s wrong, or it’s unfair.  That’s a concept that should be lodged in adult brains, and yet doesn’t seem to have taken root in a handful of very loud, very confused Americans.  This comes from someone who paid his taxes 2004-2008 while I was disagreeing with my president, and didn’t ball up any tea bags and throw them over a fence.

So Gonzales, who sidled up to Bush like Pettigrew to Voldemort – who’s “empathy” toward the president tainted everything he did… this guy’s going to give a lecture?  The guy who did all this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alberto_Gonzales#Controversies

He left because of allegations of perjury.

Whaddya say we just agree that he’s not trustworthy, that his opinions always have an agenda, and we get on with our day?