I don’t mean to belabor the point, but Rep. John Hostettler (R-Ind.) is just a little too nutty to ignore.
Let’s review for a moment. There’s a Ten Commandments case in Hostettler’s congressional district that he wants to keep in place. In February, he wrote to the president, urging Bush, as head of the executive branch of government, to refuse to enforce the court order. Last week, Hostettler took this to the next level, convincing House Republicans to support a measure that would prohibit the use of federal funds to enforce a court order in the case.
Yesterday, perhaps concerned that his provision in Congress would be taken out in committee, Hostettler lashed out at Bush (again), complaining about the president’s support for the rule of law.
“I am disappointed that the President has taken the position that he will endorse the opinion of the federal judiciary if they call for the removal of the Ten Commandments on the grounds of the County courthouse in Princeton, Indiana. But not only will he endorse the decision, he will also instruct his U. S. Marshals to remove the monument if the time comes, according to the Department of Justice letter dated April 19, 2005.
“This would be the first time in the history of the Republic that a president will have removed such a monument. I wish the President would have more forcefully asserted his clear and unique Executive authority that American presidents historically have exercised. It is evident that this Administration believes the federal judiciary is not only infallible in their judgment, of which they are independent, but omnipotent in the enforcement of that judgment, of which they are actually completely dependent on the Executive Branch.
Hostettler implored Bush to ignore the federal court ruling. Bush’s Justice Department said no. So Hostettler is condemning the president.
The real problem with this scenario? It makes the Bush gang look reasonable by comparison.