Democrats planned to do away with filibuster for Supreme Court nominees if they won in 2016

Erick Erickson:
Democrats cannot help but beclown themselves over Neil Gorsuch. After Barack Obama’s election, Democrats convinced themselves they would never, ever again be in the minority so it was safe to scrap the filibuster for nominations. Harry Reid and Chuck Schumer whipped the Democrats into line and forced through the change. They did not scrap the filibuster. They just determined it did not apply to nominations. They carefully exempted Supreme Court nominations. But, so convinced were they that Hillary Clinton would win the Presidency and they would retake the Senate, Reid and Schumer preemptively announced they would scuttle the filibuster for Supreme Court nominees in 2017.

Well, things did not go as planned. After the Democrats originally scrapped the filibuster, Republicans took back the Senate and refused to confirm any new judges in retribution. When the election went to Trump, the Democrats had already tipped their hand that they intended to scrap the filibuster for the Supreme Court. Now the GOP is doing it for them.

All the Democrats have left is hysteria. Swallowing their intellectual honesty, Senators Dick Durbin and Sheldon Whitehouse led the latest and most hysterical attack on Neil Gorsuch. Gorsuch, according to the Democrats, is a member of a secretive, extremist group that has lobbied for Gorsuch under the radar. This nefarious, radical group of the right has been plotting for years to place Gorsuch on the Supreme Court it seems.

The name of this nefarious, secretive, extremist group? That would be the Federalist Society.

The Federal Society is so nefarious, secretive, and extreme that every single sitting member of the United States Supreme Court has spoken at its events. Justice Elena Kagan, when she served as Harvard Law School’s dean, declared “I love the Federalist Society.”
...
There is more.

When it comes to the Supreme Court the Democrats can be expected to do whatever they think they can get away with to push their agenda.  The main reason is that they see the court as a way to impose the evils of liberalism that they cannot do at the ballot box.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Should Republicans go ahead and add Supreme Court Justices to head off Democrats

Washington Post: Some Democrats eye adding more justices to the Supreme Court to change its ideological bent The once-remote idea has gained the attention of liberals angered by the GOP push to remake the federal courts. Probably the easy way to defeat this court-packing scheme is for Trump to propose doing the same thing now.  It would lead to Democrat denunciations and claims that it would be wrong, thereby blowing up any attempt by them in the unfortunate event of Democrats winning a presidential election.
Read more

29 % of companies say they are unlikely to keep insurance after Obamacare

Conn Carroll: A new survey of 368 midsize to large companies found that 29% of them are considering terminating their active employee health care plans when Obamacare is full implemented in 2014. Only 71% of employers surveyed said they did not expect to drop their health coverage, while 20% said they did not know and 9% said they were planning to exit. The latest survey, conducted by Towers Watson, echoes an ealier survey by McKinsey & Co. finding that 30% of private-sector employers were planning to drop their employee health insurance coverage by 2014. When the Congressional Budget Office crunched Obamacare's spending numbers, they estimated that only 7% of employees currently covered by employer-sponsored plans would lose their plans. ... This means the cost of the health care fiasco will be hundreds of billions more than estimated by the CBO and Congressional Democrat. It is also clear that Obama's pledge that you could keep your health care plan if you wanted t
Read more

Bin Laden's concern about Zarqawi's remains

James Robbins: ... Bin Laden suggests that President Bush should allow Zarqawi’s body to be returned to his family in Jordan, but this is a matter that is up to the Jordanian government, which so far has not shown much interest in facilitating a homecoming. Bin Laden mocks King Abdullah II, calling him a Coalition minion, and asking “w hat scares you about Abu Musab after he’s dead? You know that his funeral, if allowed to happen, would be a huge funeral showing the extent of sympathy with the mujahedin.” A large crowd would definitely turn out, though most people would be on hand to demonstrate their anger and disgust. Last November’s hotel bombings in Amman , masterminded by Zarqawi, are still fresh in people’s memory, and mentioning them to Jordanians has the same visceral impact as memory of the 9/11 attacks does here. Jordan has adopted a zero-tolerance policy towards those who choose to mourn the country’s least favorite son, and four opposition members of parliament who paid con
Read more