Can the highest court shut down a political party that becomes too far-right in its beliefs?

It happened in Belgium. BBC reports the following:

Belgium's highest court has ruled that the Flemish far-right Vlaams Blok party is racist.

[Now please, readers, I am not advocating any such measures here, and since I am still getting tons of traffic from the wonderful people from the site that advocates the use of assault weapons, I do not want at at all lead you to believe that I am out there promoting any ban on far-right political agendas. Uh-uh, no way! Free speech and all that, go 2nd Amendment! --or whatever it is that you are seeking to protect.]

Back to the Belgians then: With the ruling comes an end to federal funding and access to TV airtime and so the party has effectively been run out of business. Note that this wasn’t just a fringe movement. The BBC notes that recent opinion polls indicate that the Vlaams Blok party is the most popular party in the Dutch-speaking region of Flanders. Where did it run into trouble? In taking a strong position on immigration (toned down recently from advocating the return of immigrants to their home countries, to saying that non-European immigrants can remain in Belgium so long as they adopt Belgian rules and values).

I’m sorry for every short cut I ever took in teaching law

This afternoon I had to attend a hearing and listen to a lawyer present an argument on behalf of a client. To say that he was a sleazy, crass, lacking in civility to say nothing of intellect – would be an understatement.

How did he ever ascend to the status of “primary litigator” in a local law firm? More importantly, how did he ever make it through law school?

I am determined to get tougher, to tighten-up in the classroom and demand even more of my students at every turn.

Am I scaring my one-L’s yet? Not to worry. Every single one I have right now is already better suited to practice law than the attorney I dealt with this afternoon. Ever try directing questions to a horse’s rear-end? I did, today.

Now, if the Republicans would like to pluck this character out of the ranks of trial attorneys and send him packing, it would be okay by me.

2 soon 2 B 4-got-10

An elementary school buddy wrote that in my autograph book (so ‘hot’ in the early 60s). She was bad at arithmetic and she made it out to be equation (2+2+4=10) that of course failed to be very convincing.

This morning a WashPost article describes a re-energized Kerry who not only is intending to be a powerful force in the Senate in the next several years, but is currently also assessing the possibility of running again on the Democratic ticket in 2008. Other faces: Howard Dean is considering becoming chairman of the Democratic National Committee.

Let’s be honest here. How excited about these developments are we? I myself did not vote for Kerry as merely an anti-Bush statement. Although initially an Edwards supporter, somewhere along the way (try: first debate) I became convinced that this guy was running on a pretty decent platform.

But now I want to say “step aside, fellows. I loved you when you were up (in the polls), I mourn your fall, but I do not want another ‘come up from behind’ election.” It’s not only about electability, but electability is a minimal prerequisite. I have toughened my position here. I don’t want the possibility of success. I want surefire success. The Democrats have lost to the Republicans in 5 out of the last 7 presidential elections. Enough already. Don’t we have a Karl Rove-type among our ranks (cunning, evil, effective)?