tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3894937.post3488177535644936174..comments2023-11-05T06:55:21.417-05:00Comments on Stupid Enough Unexplanation: The Childish ConservativesBryanthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10356055226606119829noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3894937.post-42270053826107311212009-05-28T08:59:07.269-04:002009-05-28T08:59:07.269-04:00It depends on your definition of childish, I suppo...It depends on your definition of childish, I suppose. Insisting that the conservative interpretation is the only "real" interpretation of the constitution seems similar in kind to a child saying "only my mom really knows how to make meatloaf."Bryanthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10356055226606119829noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3894937.post-67036475382057122642009-05-28T08:12:42.857-04:002009-05-28T08:12:42.857-04:00They would still be necessary for when lower court...They would still be necessary for when lower courts made errors. That's what "courts of appeal" did for most of the entire history of the Anglo-American legal tradition. Their function as guardian of the law's interpretation as we are familiar with it is a relatively recent phenomenon.<br /><br />And it isn't childish to think that language has a clear, exclusive meaning. It's not right, but it's not childish.Random Goblinhttp://byzantium.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.com