The media and Democrats think us little people don’t get it.
The headline for this article starts out like this:
The burgeoning fight to fill Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s Supreme Court seat is pouring fuel onto already simmering tensions in the Senate and threatening to fundamentally reshape the institution.
In essence, our institutions are under attack because the Senate will perform it’s duties as defined under the Constitution. The left made this argument back in 2016 that the institution was under assault when Senator McConnell chose not to consent on Obama’s nomination of Judge Merrick Garland. They demanded he put the nominee to a vote on the floor. It seems only reasonable that if the roles were reversed, the Democrats would have no problem pushing through their nominee. History tells us that would be true.
Since speculation began that Amy Coney Barrett would be the President’s pick to fill the vacant Supreme Court seat, the left has gone on unhinged rants that our democracy is in peril. Interestingly, the article mentions all the procedural moves that Schumer and his band of merry toddlers are using to slow the business of the Senate.
The acolytes within the media are doing their part to show their disdain, throwing every possible slime bomb into the fray against the nominee and the process:
If they think this will win over voters, it’s only because they fail to learn from their mistakes.
In 2013, Senator Harry Reid decided that he would end the filibuster for circuit court judges so that Obama’s nominees would be confirmed. Senator McConnell pointed out in no uncertain terms that if Reid decided to end the long standing rules, the Democrats would end up regretting it.
In fact, it wasn’t Senator Reid who was frustrated; it was President Obama. Obama, with the help of the media, was trying hard to leave a lasting legacy on the country. Filling judicial vacancies with leftist jurists were part of the larger plan to push the progressive agenda and cement his role in reshaping American politics. Unfortunately, he made a tactical mistake early on.
In 2009, then President Obama was sitting at the head of a table surrounded by economic advisors and leaders of both parties in Congress. Before the meeting, Obama had expressed willingness to work with Republicans in drafting a stimulus bill, including ideas suggested by then House minority Whip Eric Cantor. However, in that meeting, Cantor and his colleagues learned that the stimulus bill had already been written by Nancy Pelosi and David Obey, then chair of the House Appropriations committee. When confronted with this, Obama said to Cantor, “Elections have consequences, and at the end of the day, I won.” He would repeat those words through 2010.
After that, not a single Republican signed on to the stimulus package, nor for Obama’s signature legislation, the Affordable Care Act. Years later, Obama would lament that taking such a stance cost his party control of the House in 2010. Had he given the Republicans some concessions, he might have been able to get more of his agenda enacted, even if it meant smaller victories. Still, he persuaded Reid to do what was necessary to get his judicial picks confirmed. Reid promptly removed the filibuster over the objections of McConnell. The Republicans won control of the Senate the following year in 2014. The Democrats have been reeling ever since.
Since Trump’s election, the Democrats dug in and refuse to compromise. They managed to get back control of the House in 2018 on the message of healthcare and kitchen table issues. However, once sworn in, the Democrats promises have fallen short. Instead, they chose to impeach the President; held up pandemic relief to pursue liberal reforms; supported looters and rioters destroying cities, businesses and communities; and passed a slew of legislation that would never make it through the Senate. This was not the bargain promised to voters. All that effort with little to show for it.
So who is really trying to destroy institutions? Judge Barrett’s nomination will be yet another chapter in just how low the left will go. I expect the tantrums to get worse because they have nothing, except that they hate Trump and are willing to burn it all down to get rid of him. Only truly safe Democrats in heavy blue areas can run on Trump Derangement Syndrome and win. It won’t work everywhere else when challengers can show a long list of what wasn’t accomplished – aka, promises not kept.
And sadly, the more they descend to new lows, thousands of newly awaken Trump supporters will go to the polls. Hopefully, those same voters will cast their votes to remove the Democrats representing those districts and states. Maybe then, Democrats will learn the lesson of Saint Obama after he felt the sting of his own words:
“If you want just 100 percent and the notion is that the winner really does take all—all the spoils—sooner or later that government is going to break down.” – President Obama to New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman, August 8, 2014.
Almost seems prophetic.