Comments on: The Democrats redefine the phrase “court-packing” to meet their needs

By: Barry Meislin

Barry Meislin — Wed, 14 Oct 2020 13:09:45 +0000

As long as we’re opening up cans of worms (of which there seems to be a generous supply)…
https://nypost.com/2020/10/14/email-reveals-how-hunter-biden-introduced-ukrainian-biz-man-to-dad/
H/T Instapundit

No doubt the Democrats—you know, the party of VALUES—are infuriated at the utter lack of respect shown by an article of this ilk both toward the candidate (e.g., “How can you be so disrespectful? So awful? So repugnant? He’ll be 78 years old next month! He’s the Democratic presidential candidate!! AND he’s suffering from dementia!!! How DARE you?? Have you no SHAME???”)…and toward his dear, dear son Hunter (e.g., “How can you be so hateful? His father is the Democratic presidential candidate! He himself is the father of a new child!! He delivered an address at the DNC!! He’s served on the boards of many prestigious international companies!! How DARE you?? Have you no SHAME???”) etc., etc…

File under: Moral Outrage, Inc.

By: JohnTyler

JohnTyler — Wed, 14 Oct 2020 12:57:14 +0000

All tradition and decorum in evaluating a SC justice went out the window when Reagan nominated Robert Bork in 1987.
IN that disgusting, repugnant Stalinist show-trial , the demokrats decided they would paint Bork, for all intents and purposes, as a Nazi, KKK and Confederate States of America supporter all rolled into one.

And let’s all guess who were the ringleaders in this deceitful hit job on Bork. Just who played the roles – to perfection !!! – of Roland Freisler and Andrey Vyshinsky??

Drum roll please,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

JOE BIDEN and the murderer TED KENNEDY.

The Bork fiasco gave the English lexicon a new word; “borked.”

By: Molly+Brown

Molly+Brown — Wed, 14 Oct 2020 07:38:00 +0000

Jamie nails it. There is a very good reason SC appointments have become so divisive and bitter. And we all know what it is. Roe etc. are side issues compared to the real prize. The SC is the only way the left can override the Constitution and it’s protection of individual liberty. For example, they would love to do away with the 2nd Amendment but would never be able to do so under the existing mechanism. Two thirds of the Congress and three quarters of the states? LOL! But by legislating from the bench, they can water down the Bill of Rights to a hollow shell. Every originalist judge on the court is an obstacle to the left’s ultimate goal. To ‘fundamentally transform’* this country. No wonder they rant and rage.
*And frankly, I find this to be treason.

By: shadow

shadow — Wed, 14 Oct 2020 02:56:38 +0000

The link is very helpful.

By: neo

neo — Wed, 14 Oct 2020 01:44:58 +0000

shadow: If you go to the link I offered in my comment here, you'll see that there was indeed a time when "it was considered normal to just pick a highly qualified judge and confirm him." That is, presidents of course considered judicial philosophy and politics when making their picks, but the opposing side did not oppose the picks unless there was some sort of graft or corruption, and it was not unusual to have unanimous or nearly-unanimous confirmation votes.

By: shadow

shadow — Wed, 14 Oct 2020 00:14:28 +0000

Ilya Shapiro recently came out with a book on the history of the Supreme Court, a pretty quick read. It’s full of fun facts – yes, the Supreme Court has been expanded before; initially justices were added when new circuit courts of appeals were added. And there never was a time when it was considered normal to just pick a highly qualified judge and confirm him – presidents often considered judicial philosophy, as well as party loyalty and regional representation. The federal courts have never been apolitical. That’s not excusing the nastiness of recent decades, though.

By: Barry Meislin

Barry Meislin — Tue, 13 Oct 2020 18:20:55 +0000

As long as we’re on the topic of “redefine”, let’s take a look at Susan Rice’s gloriously exculpatory “by the book”:
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/declassified-fbi-spreadsheet-exposes-steele-dossier-farce-media-reports-fbi-reports-media

Good move Ms. Rice, and super-convincing!

By: OlderandWheezier

OlderandWheezier — Tue, 13 Oct 2020 18:04:56 +0000

So let me see if I’ve got this right. It’s now perfectly okay to demand to see to the minutest detail the tax returns of a public (or private, for that matter) individual, but not okay to expect a candidate for the highest office to admit whether or not he’ll overthrow 150 years of established and deservedly respected precedent in order to incontrovertibly establish a hyper-partisan U. S. Supreme Court?

By: om

om — Tue, 13 Oct 2020 18:03:47 +0000

Mr Bunge

“Stephens is completely, utterly, inarguably wrong when he implies that Trump is the problem.”

inarguably – some may disagree 😉

Dial it to 11?

By: MBunge

MBunge — Tue, 13 Oct 2020 17:32:49 +0000

As some smart people have pointed out, what’s going on fundamentally right now is the consensus/paradigm that’s governed public affairs since the end of the Cold War and possible the entire post-WWII era no longer works and is being challenged on multiple levels. The people who have not only benefited from that consensus/paradigm but in many cases have a great deal of their self-worth invested in it are desperately struggling to keep everything just as it’s been. Desperate people are not exactly known for their sober rationality.

Stephen Miller, redsteeze on Twitter, has a new article out in the Spectator.

https://twitter.com/redsteeze/status/1316052369784754177

The premise is “Trump dragged the GOP through hell but it was worth it to the Right because they got three Supreme Court Justices out of it.”

Now, put aside the blithe dismissal of what Trump’s accomplished on trade, foreign policy, deregulation, and immigration. Let’s even overlook the implicit acknowledgement that Jeb or Marco or the other possible alternatives to Trump in 2016 could or even would have lost to Hillary. Stephens is completely, utterly, inarguably wrong when he implies that Trump is the problem. Trump didn’t drag the GOP to hell. The GOP was already in hell and Trump’s the one who came along and offered people a way out.

Even if you think Trump is traveling down a path toward destruction, the pivotal question is “Why were people willing to follow him?” I respect Miller for being an anti-Trumper who hasn’t abandoned everything he believed in to grift off liberal billionaires but his total blindness to how people LIKE HIM made Trump possible is beyond excuse.

Mike