Timothy Noah and his fellow idiots on the Left are completely missing President Bush's point in invoking the Dred Scott decision during Friday night's debate.
According to Noah and the tinfoil hat crowd, "Dred Scott" is supposedly a "codeword" which the "religious right" will understand to mean "Roe v. Wade." In other words, "opposing Dred Scott" means "overturning Roe v. Wade."
There's no question that many conservatives have compared the two rulings. And there's no question that the two rulings have many things in common--first and foremost that they are pristine examples of outrageous judicial activism.
But Bush's point is much simpler than the mouth-breathing Left wants to realize. When you let the Constitution be a wax nose to be molded by the personal opinions of the Supreme Court, you are at the mercy of the wavering opinions of a few unelected and unaccountable elites. You might think that's great as long as they agree with you, but as soon as it's your ox being gored, you might not be so thrilled.
Liberals love the activism of Roe v. Wade, while they (presumably) hate the activism of Dred Scott. But that's precisely Bush's point. The point liberals can't seem to get through their thick skulls is that both are examples of judicial manufacture of law.
Bush believes that the making of Constitutional law should be left to the people and to the Constitution itself. That only affects any particular ruling (such as Roe) insofar as the particular ruling is pure judicial lawmaking.
By screaming bloody murder over it, the liberals are proving that they know Roe is a judicial house of cards ready to fall at any moment. They ought to question whether they really want to champion a judicial philosophy that creates decisions like Dred Scott. That's Bush's point, and despite the ridicule he initially received, he's proving to have drawn some blood on it.