Monday, July 04, 2005

Not a Sandra Day O'Connor Post

To keep my liberal feminist blogger credentials, I know I should be writing a post about Sandra Day O'Connor, replete with the requisite links to inform and inspire activism. But I just don't want to.

For one thing, as I've said before, I'm in something of a narcissistic domestic bubble. I'm preoccupied with a major career decision that I have to make this week. After that, I need to think about renovating the attic. I spend most of my time with a nine year old and a four year old, and when I encounter other adults, we mainly talk about things like the nine year old, the four year old, the career decision, and renovating the attic. When I read the East Coast Big City Newspaper, I have no idea what's going on locally, which for some reason makes the national and world news seem equally unreal. So the Supreme Court is just not at the forefront of my attention, even though of course I know it should be.

The other reason I don't want to write about Sandra Day O'Connor is that I just don't think anything we say or do will make a difference. Karl Rove believes that hard-core conservatism is the way to go, so that's the way Bush will go. I know lots of people continue to fantasize that he's a closet moderate, but let's face it, he's not. And he's never listened to us before, so why should he listen to us now? Indeed, if Kerry were president, he'd be naming a liberal regardless of conservative protests. That's how it works, at least at this level.

And while part of me has a lot of sympathy for O'Connor and believes it is her right to make her own choices, this decision shows where she really stands. Here's her son in the New York Times article about why she did it:

"There's no telling who will be our next president, and I just think, like so many of her decisions, it just kind of made sense," her son said.

"And I think in some regards, the stars aligned, and it was just kind of time," he said. "I don't think she would want to be an old 'hanger-oner.' And if she didn't do it now, she might have been there another 10 years, if you do the math, depending on what happens down the road with future presidential elections."

In other words, O'Connor was determined to have a Republican select her replacement, and she knows as well as any of us what that will mean. So much for her commitment to Roe v. Wade.

There: I've blogged Sandra Day O'Connor despite myself. Depressing, huh? If you want something more informative and activism inspiring, try Dawn (down below the baby and adoption stuff) or Dr. B (interspersed with Karl Rove and Pseudonymous Kid anecdotes).

[And if you want to know what's really on my mind this evening, it's: 1) how thrilling it was to watch E teach herself to swim this afternoon; 2) that we need to remember to bring a blanket when we go to the pond because the towels just get too sandy when we lay them straight on the ground; 3) how glad I am that I put the vacuum cleaner on a kitchen chair, balanced on the side of the tub, and vacuumed the disgusting bathroom fan vent in the ceiling light.]

No comments: