Split in the Ranks of the Liberal Press

Predictably, The New York Times supports the blocking of the California recall election (search) by the nation's most notorious court. But The Los Angeles Times takes a different point of view, and that's a surprise.

First, why you should care if you don't live in the Golden State. We Americans believe that we can dictate the tempo of our country, that we can decide leadership and policy. That's the way the country was founded. And that's worked pretty well, as we're the strongest, freest nation in the history of mankind.

But the progressive far left has found a way around the will of the folks, the courts. They know if they sue and sue and sue, sooner or later, basic rights like freedom of expression, the right to bear arms, the right to be shielded from harmful conduct by others will be struck down by some dopey court.

In 2002, the Supreme Court overturned the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals based in San Francisco an astounding 75 percent of the time primarily because five Supreme Court justices are traditionalists who see value in upholding the structure of the original constitution, not revising it to fit an ideological viewpoint.

There is no question the people of California want a chance to recall Governor Davis. More than two million of them signed a recall petition. Only about 7.5 million voted in the governor's race last November. So this is not some narrow cast going on here.

But the San Francisco court wants to save Davis and is using the chad excuse to do so. As we mentioned, the same voting machines were in place when Davis was elect and re-elected. So as The Wall Street Journal says, let's have the 9th invalidate those votes.

Talking Points hopes everybody's getting the picture here. America is this close to being ruled by judges, not we the people. And some in the elite media can't wait until that happens, especially since many courts have veered sharply to the left.

But The L.A. Times impressed me today. That paper hates the recall, but realizes it is the will of the people. Perhaps editor John Carroll is trying to get the rank ideology out of that paper as his editorial page says a delay in the recall "works against the public interest."

Now that's certainly true, as any delay favors Davis. But the bigger picture is that the press must speak strongly against activist courts. And the ACLU were trying to change America into a secular nation.

All the polls say we the people don't want that. So this battle must be waged by honest media, hard.

And that's The Memo.

The Most Ridiculous Item of the Day

This coming Sunday, your humble correspondent -- that's me -- will be the cover boy on Parade magazine. Look at that picture. Now some say I look a little like Fred McMurray here, you know. Remember the guy on My Three Sons. Skinny little pipe. In fact, this picture was so warm and cuddly dogs are licking the magazine cover.

Anyway, the article is from an excerpt from my new book, Who's Looking Out for You? which is in the stores a week from today. Of course, you can order it on the dot-coms, Amazon, Barnes & Noble, Books-a-Million, and billoreilly.com where signed editions are available as well.

Now I think you're going to like this book because it's about you, and, obviously, with all the defamation in the wind these days, this book is a statement, not just a read. My goal: sell a hundred more copies than Hillary's book. Ridiculous? We'll keep you posted.