Why Voting Doesn't Matter

Rick Garnett trots out Kagan as a reason why elections matter:

Future elections might undo some of the President’s policies, but his views about the Constitution, the powers of the national government, and the role of unelected federal judges, are now being locked in securely on the Court.

Ah, so future elections will be less meaningful, presumably because of the effects of this past one, I suppose.
But we should apply a clear eye to past history and note how Republican nominations to the Supreme Court have failed to bring about any meaningful change. The Court is still pro-abortion, still willing to violate property rights, and still strengthening the scope and power of the federal government at the expense of the states and the people.

What must be done?

We have to reject precisely the argument Garnett provides because it locks us in the same merry-go-round political nightmare that has effected us since 1972. The Constitution, ultimately, is a piece of paper and if you want it obeyed, someone has to be willing to apply it to recalcitrant political bodies. You cannot defend the constitution by electing people who promise to nominate people to the recalcitrant political body! It just doesn't work. After you are finished throwing the bad people in jail, then you can get around to nominating a new court.

What is being done now is a con game. Republican politicians like their position; they can pay lip service to pro-life concerns and get a solid block of votes without lifting a finger. No one in any branch of the federal government has a strong incentive to check this out of control court. Think about it, the checks and balances, as interpreted by the very problem (the Supreme Court) only exist at the federal level, which means, as long as they don't step on each others' feet, the various branches of the federal government can get along quite well while crushing the states and individuals.

Remember who the alternative was: John McCain. I don't believe McCain is really pro-life (remember his position on stem cell research?), so I doubt his nominations would be much better in that department, nor are his more recent shenanigans very comforting with regard to federal power.

Should someone give us a compelling reason to believe they'd break this stupid cycle, by all means vote, but no one should vote for anyone using the circular logic that the Republicans use. One cannot defend the Constitution with the Constitution, which is what the theater around Supreme Court nominations amounts to. If paper had the power to get the oath-breakers to get up and toddle off to jail by themselves- well they'd have done that along time ago. No, someone has to have the will to move against the court, impeach, remove much of it's jurisdiction, etc...

Anything else is just a shell game designed to keep the peasants preoccupied.