I am afraid that there is a certain class of race-problem solvers who don’t want the patient to get well, because as long as the disease holds out they have not only an easy means of making a living, but also an easy medium through which to make themselves prominent before the public
The US Senate has confirms Amy Coney Barrett’s nomination to the SCOTUS. They did so in record time and, unsurprisingly in the extreme, without a single Democrat vote. This secures the safety and efficacy of the Supreme Court for decades to come.
To me, the most interesting and important part of this is that Barrett’s confirmation as a SCOTUS Justice is a critical event but is not truly news. Her confirmation and the timeliness of it were never in doubt. Nor was the total opposition to both by the Democrats, who were, are, and will continue to be seething over not being able to “Bork” her nomination.
Barrett’s confirmation is important to America’s future but that it happened and happened now is just another case of Republicans playing by the Democrats’ “rules” and beating them at their own game. It’s just another day in the death spiral of Congressional politics.
The one thing Americans can count on the Democrats for is that we can’t count upon them for any consistency or any adherence to long-standing norms, mores, or values, but we can count upon them for viciousness, false equivalencies, and general malfeasance. Their stance upon the respective nominations of Merrick Garland by their boy, Obama in 2016 vs. their stance on President Trump’s nominee, Amy Coney Barrett in 2020 is another perfect example of this pernicious behavior.
False Equivalency For the Loss
Democrats, especially those in the Senate, have been quick in their anger to claim that Republican Senators are being hypocritical by having refused to allow Obama’s Garland nomination to move forward while “rushing” President Trump’s Barrett nomination through. But this is just semi-hysterical false equivalency on their part. The underlying situation between the two nominations is fundamentally different, though quite similar on the surface.
That fundamental difference is that, when Obama nominated Garland near-ish the end of his time in the White House, he was not up for reelection; he was term-limited and would definitely be leaving office despite some quasi-hysterical and spurious claims to the contrary.
Senate Majority Leader, Mitch McConnell’s oft willfully misinterpreted statement was true then and non-applicable now.
I believe the overwhelming view of the Republican Conference in the Senate is that this nomination should not be filled, this vacancy should not be filled by this lame duck (emphasis added) president.
The American people are perfectly capable of having their say on this issue, so let’s give them a voice. Let’s let the American people decide. The Senate will appropriately revisit the matter when it considers the qualifications of the nominee the next president nominates, whoever that might be.
— Senate Majority Leader, Mitch McConnell
Yeah, sane and rational people can understand the difference between a POTUS who can’t serve another term in office and one who might not do so. Democrats and the sorts who vote for them? Not so much.
In other words, the Dems are behaving as we, the People have been forced to accept as the norm for them, stupidly, inconsistently except in their quest for either power or destruction, and despicably.
Some Complaints And Tangential Caveats
Sadly, it’s not all righteousness and roses on our side either. There is some rank hypocrisy and cynical realpolitik being spun out by our politicians this shit show. Despite having a firm and steady grasp of the necessities of realpolitik, some things rankle.
I’m not pleased at all that Mitch McConnell cited the “Biden Rule” in 2016 while blocking Garland nomination, but ignores that he did so now. Then-Senator Joe Biden didn’t want any SCOTUS Judges to confirmed during any Presidential election season, not just during the end of a lame duck’s tenure in office.
It also rankles that the 2nd “reason” commonly cited for the difference in behavior in Senate between Garland’s and Barrett’s nomination is that the Senate majority in 2016 was the opposition party to the POTUS, whereas it isn’t in 2020.
Call me naive and/or delusional, I actually agree with Obama’s statement that, “[confirmation of nominees to the] … Supreme Court is supposed to be above politics, not an extension of politics.” The Senate being in the hands of the “other” party shouldn’t make so much of a difference that it is blithely stated as one of the two reasons for a SCOTUS nomination being blocked.
On the soon to-be-infuriating topic of the Democrats’ rancorous, vitriolic, unconstitutional, bigoted, and utterly unhinged response to President Trump’s nomination of Amy Coney Barrett to the US Supreme Court’s bench, it’s best to turn Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s (D-CA) projection back upon her and her ilk – “The dogma lives loudly within you. And that’s of concern.“
So, expect Barrett’s confirmation hearings to be horrifically vile and nasty. Understand that they will be filled with anti-Catholic bigotry in direct, boldfaced contravention of the Constitution’s Article VI, Clause 3, which prohibits any religious test for holding any Office or public Trust. Expect the Dems to threaten to “Pack The Court” if they ever concurrently gain the Presidency and a Senate majority in the future and believe them.
Their Presidential candidate, “Creepy Uncle” Joe Biden has already proclaimed that they’re fighting for the soul of America. Believe them! Take them at their word, for this once they speak truly!
My Fellow Americans, understand, accept, and internalize the sad fact that this isn’t politics as usual. We are already in a civil war. We are already in a race war. We are already in a holy war!
Confirmation bias is a real thing. The Democrats just have an extreme case of it that presents in a specifically pernicious and destructive manner. Then, they are et alinsane, some of them congenitally, so this is not shocking.
I’m not going to sugarcoat anything. I’m glad Justice Ginsburg is gone. While I don’t rejoice in her death – She was never that bad of a person – I’m very glad she’s no longer poisoning the SCOTUS with her well-written but piss-poor, agenda-driven opinions.
Frankly, Justice Ginsburg was, proper jurisprudence-wise, the worst judge in the current SCOTUS. Only her counterpart, the late Justice Scalia came close to matching her failings to place the law above personal opinion. Hence, her passing is a boon to America in my opinion.
And no, none of this detracts from Ginsburg’s historical significance. She was the 2nd woman appointed to the Court and the first Jewish woman – and only the 2nd Jew – to be so appointed. Yet, that significance is solely identity-based and, thus suspect.
So no; I don’t in any way lament Ginsburg passing since it was the only way she’d leave the Court.
NOTE:To those sorts who would attack me over this post: I have a solid background the law, some of which was in a professional capacity, and actually regularly read SCOTUS and Appellate Court opinions. If you can’t argue in that arena, best you just shut up and move along.
If you can do so, however, bring it on! A robust, even vitriolic, debate upon the specifics, nature, purpose, and fundamental basis of law in America is part and parcel to this “Grand Experiment” which is our nation.
Reflections From A Murky Pond is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com.