Considering the hearings are underway to appoint a new Chief Justice of the United States, it is important to understand what the liberal democrats seek in a candidate for the U.S. Supreme Court.

If you listened to any portions of the first two hearings, you may be wondering why they called them hearings, since the democrats ask Judge Roberts questions, and instead of listening to his answer, they interrupt him. So much for Roberts' Rules of Order, respect, dignity, and decorum. I suppose calling the process an "inquisition" instead of a "hearing" would be more appropriate.

At this point, it is somewhat difficult to determine what the democrats are looking for in a new Chief Justice. It is probably even more difficult for them, since they do not allow Judge Roberts to answer their questions. However, the democrats keep mentioning the word "mainstream", the name "Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg", "the Ginsburg Rule", and so forth. Therefore, I am guessing they are looking for someone they consider to be as "mainstream" as Justice Ginsburg, who was appointed to the Supreme Court in 1993 by President Clinton.

What makes Justice Ginsburg the example most cited by the Democrats? Was it her appointment by President Clinton? Her staunch support of women's rights? Her service as General Counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) from 1973 until 1980? Or was it her book, Sex Bias in the U.S. Code, that she wrote in 1977.

Hopefully, it did not have anything to do with her involvement with the ACLU, because that organization has consistently attacked every reference to God or Christianity in schools, the Pledge of Allegiance, and in or on public buildings. It is amazing that the Bible has not been banned in church. Since 2000, the ACLU has filed over 100 lawsuits to remove Christianity and God from the public square in America. When the ACLU cannot change the will of the people, they will change the laws of the land.

But getting back to the main question of what liberals seek in a judge, based on their questions of Judge Roberts during the hearings, the individual would have to be someone who thinks exactly as they do. Someone that is, in their own words, "mainstream." And since they refer to her so much, someone like Justice Ginsburg, or at least someone who embodies the judicial activism of of the ACLU, and supports a progressive socialist agenda.

The term "mainstream" is a buzz-word that seems to be in-vogue among Democrats in-volved in the judicial hearings. Yet, the term is somewhat of an enigma to rest of America. When the Democrats use the term "mainstream", are they talking about average Americans like George Soros, Ted Turner, and Donald Trump? Or maybe Michael Moore, Sean Penn, and Kanye West? Perhaps they are referring to the "mainstream media types" like Dan Rather, Mike Wallace, or maybe Andy Rooney, who, by the way, gave up his Lexus for a BMW. Does anyone buy American anymore?

Anyway, as stated earlier, the Democrats also frequently refer to Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, so it may be a good idea to read her book, not only to better understand what the progressive Democrats consider to be "mainstream", but who they consider to be "mainstream" from a judicial point of view.

And just in case you do not have a copy at home, or in your local library, I have listed some of the actions called for by Justice Ginsburg in her book. Maybe it will help you decide if you are a member of their "mainstream" America.

What follows is an outline of just a few of the "mainstream" changes to laws that Judge Ginsburg believes should be enacted. Changes supported by many democrat politicians, and progressive liberals across the land. Laws that they wish to impose through a combination of efforts in the judicial and legislative branches of state and federal government, while often ignoring the voice of the American people.

On page 97 of her book, Justice Ginsburg opposed laws against prostitution and wrote in her book that "prostitution, as a consensual act between adults, is arguably within the zone of privacy protected by recent constitutional decisions."

Ginsburg wrote that the Mann Act is "offensive." (The Mann Act punishes persons who engage in interstate sex traffic of women and girls.) She concluded such acts also fell "within the zone of privacy." (Page 98)

She also called for the integration of males and females in prisons and reformatories to balance the "conditions of imprisonment, security, and housing." She explained, "If the grand design of such institutions is to prepare inmates for return to the community as persons equipped to benefit from and contribute to civil society, then perpetuation of single-sex institutions should be rejected." (Page 101)

Ginsburg wanted to make it legal for persons to have consensual sex as long as they were not "less than 12 years old." (Page 102)

She called for the integration of the Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts because they "perpetuate stereotyped sex roles." (Page 145)

She even cast constitutional doubt on the legality of "Mother's Day and Father's Day as separate holidays." (Page 146)

She insisted on the integration of "college fraternity and sorority chapters" to create "college social societies." (Page 169)

She asserted that laws against "bigamists, persons cohabiting with more than one woman, and women cohabiting with a bigamist" are unconstitutional. (Page 195)

This is the type of judicial nominee the liberals want to see on the Supreme Court of the United States? And these are the things considered to be "mainstream" by the Democratic Party?

Now, one final question. Are you mainstream?