Who's out of step on the Supreme Court?

Are you sick and tired of hearing the phrase "activist judge"?
Me too.
But Rush and Billy O want you to feel very, very nervous when they use the phrase "activist judge".
Except I don't.
Because Rush and Billy O are enamored of four Supreme Court Justices that represent a style of law not seen since English Common Law began to evolve out of the rights of lords and landowners sometime around the 13th century. They are not activist, at least in the way they mean it, and seem at times to be barely sentient.
The four are, of course, Justice Thomas (Want a taste of my Pepsi?), Justice Scalia (We stole an election! Get over it!) Justice Alito (I testified that I'd use my life experiences but I didn't mean it.) and Justice Roberts (What kind of American doesn't like white bread?).
These four heroes of justice stood firmly against the majority ruling in June of 2009. They felt that a judge in West Virginia who received $3 million dollars to win a seat on the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals from the CEO of Massey Energy had every right to not only hear a case against Massey but over rule the previous courts which had already found against Massey.
Who voted in the majority? You did you wild and crazy activists.
The July 19, 2009 Parade magazine reported that a poll it had conducted of its readers showed 93% of the respondents disagreed with the four judges trapped in feudal law and sided with the five "activist" judges of the court.
Don't let Rush scare you. He only speaks for 7% of the voters.
(By the way - Since the 1100s, courts have had parallel and co-equal authority to make law: "legislating from the bench" is a traditional and essential function of courts, which was carried over into the U.S. system as an essential component of the "judicial power" specified by Article III of the U.S. constitution. There are legitimate debates on how the powers of courts and legislatures should be balanced. However, a view that courts lack law-making power is historically inaccurate and constitutionally unsupportable.)