21 March 2017
THE GORSUCH NOMINATION HEARINGS
I am a fan of Jeff Greenfield, although our political persuasions are probably miles apart. He is a wonderful writer and is as measured as one could hope for when it comes to American politics. Thus, I commend this article to any reader.
As I watch the mental midgets—especially Senators Schumer, Whitehouse, Blumenthal, and Franken, I am particularly drawn to this quotation: “And the process is made worse by the uncertain grasp that many of the senators, on both sides of the aisle, have about the subtleties of constitutional law. (I am waiting for the day when an exasperated nominee challenges members of the committee to ask a question without reading from the talking points prepared by their staffs; in many cases, the silence would be deafening.)”
Senator Schumer’s resort to innuendo and New York smear tactics is particularly reprehensible. Senator Whitehouse is merely a “no load.” (A term from electrical engineering with respect to motors and electrical circuits: it means that nothing is connected to the shaft and it is not doing any useful work,” a perfect definition of the Senator.) Senator Franken is perhaps the most qualified Democrat in the Senate; he is a stand-up comedian!
Judge Gorsuch is eminently qualified to sit on the United States Supreme Court, as were, inter alia, Judges Robert Bork and Merrick Garland. In regard to Judge Garland, on 24 March 2016, I wrote this.
Of course the Democrats are unhappy that President H. Clinton did not get to appoint the next Associate Justice of the Supreme Court. Of course they are unhappy that the Constitution does not have a provision with respect to advice and consent that is similar to Article I, §7, cl 2. (“If any Bill shall not be returned by the President within ten days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, the Same shall be a Law, in like Manner as if he had signed it, unless Congress by their adjournment prevent its Return, in which Case it shall not be a Law.”)
But, as that esteemed legal scholar and lecturer in Constitutional Law, Barrack Obama, JD, observed: “Elections have consequences… .” The Democrats lost the House in 2010, Senate in 2012, and the Presidency in 2016. If the Democrats had nominated anyone other than the most divisive presidential nominee in recent memory, the second most divisive presidential nominee in recent memory would not have succeeded the second most divisive president in recent memory .
The miracle is that any honorable man or woman would subject himself or herself to the scurrilous examination of the likes of Al Franken in order to serve our Nation. The blessing is that, in spite of the unbelievable political history of the last nine years, we have the prospect of yet another honorable member of the Supreme Court, lack-weights such as Senators Schumer, Whitehouse, Franken, and Blumenthal notwithstanding.