Failed Democrat Sues Critics Over Election Loss

Former Cincinnati Congressman Steve Driehaus has slipped from being just a loser to being a bad loser. Driehaus like my former Congressman Brad Ellsworth was turned out of office after only one term. Actually Ellsworth saw quite early that his chances of winning reelection were slim to non existent and chose to run for Senator where his chances were merely slim. Bart Stupak, from Michigan's upper peninsula and ring leader of the Stupak amendment crowd that eventually caved to the demand of Speaker Pelosi had the good sense to retire. The Stupak amendment to Obamacare would have specifically forbidden any public spending for abortion. Maybe it's just something about German voters. I don't know the ethnic breakdown in Stupak's district but Driehaus and Ellsworth had to face the wrath of largely German electorates who have some old fashion ideas about keeping one's word. In any event "former" over shadows "congressman" in all three's present job descriptions.

Probably Ellsworth and Stupak just tied one on and got over it but Driehaus went to court. He is suing the Susan B. Anthony List for " loss of livelihood." The thought of giving a member of the political class the right to sue when he is turned out of office brings new meaning to the term "political elite". Driehaus claims that the Susan B. Anthony List's public statement that he had voted for federal funding of abortion was untrue therefore he is entitled to compensation. Okay, then why the big push on the part of Obama and Pelosi to deep six the Stupak amendment? Regardless of the truth of this particular issue, the notion that a jury is supposed to fact check everything said during a political campaign is ludicrous and contrary to everyone's except Driehaus' interpretation of the first amendment. Everyone except Driehaus and the federal judge that is. The judge, Timothy S. Black, an Obama appointee and a past president and director of Planned Parenthood Association of Cincinnati ruled the case could go forward. How can anyone not question the judges' ability to be impartial in this case? Imagine if a judge who had served as a National Rifle Association director were assigned a case dealing with a key second amendment issue. Someone on the House Judiciary Committee should investigated how this judge was assigned this case. We can go after judges like this. Short of impeachment the Congress can refuse to fund their functionaries. Let a judge hold court without a court reporter, a bailiff, or a clerk.