What the wicked fear will come upon them, the wise man says. Whether that applies in the present case, I leave to you, but it’s pretty obvious the left is having a melt-down over the prospect of Trump appointing a replacement for Notorious RBG.
12 thoughts on “The liberal meltdown”
Comments are closed.
That’ll be another Great American’s funeral that Trump won’t be attending.
RBG will be kind of an interesting case. She was deeply and profoundly liberal, and has a leftist personality cult around her for some reason, but she wasn’t really woke.
She and Scalia were good personal friends– she didn’t accept the “we disagree, so you must be evil and I must shun you” policy; she talked about the merits of affirmative action but didn’t practice it herself, hiring the people she thought would work best with her (liberal hypocrisy is more human in many ways than self-destructive devotion to revolutionary principle); she thought Kaepernick’s flag-kneeling was stupid; she gave sympathetic talks about *Confederacy leaders*, for Heaven’s sake, which would restart impeachment proceedings if Trump read RBG’s speech word-for-word. And this is just pulled from a day’s worth of “hmm, about that RGB..” links which have been passed around.
If she weren’t “RBG”, she’d have been cancelled a dozen times over by now, but I suspect the usefulness of her as a cause will transcend everything else.
Interesting. I didn’t know she had so much “cancel ammunition” in her past.
There is a meltdown going on. I’ll give you that. Of the proposed nominees, I don’t have a solid objection. Of course, Republicans are going to nominate and confirm. Of course. And, of course they are hypocrites and full of lies for doing this whether it’s Cruz, Graham, McConnell, Cotton, etc.
But it shouldn’t be surprising that people in power use the power that is given them. I expect nothing less. I am glad Biden isn’t talking about packing the court. I know others have talked about escalation and packing the court if Biden gets elected and there is a Repug majority in the senate.
Funniest thing I saw on Twitter was Lindsey Graham complaining about people instructing him how to act in the face of the judicial nomination. One sage said, “I only want him to listen to Lindsey Graham (of four years ago).” You can be sure that if Orange Bozo decided to nominate Ivanka, Cruz along with FNC would be extolling Ivanka as “one of the great legal minds of our times.”
Some of them definitely have a trail of statements re: Garland that they’ll contradict now. Unfortunately, our expectations for truthfulness in politics are so low that it doesn’t really matter.
QUOTE: Unfortunately, our expectations for truthfulness in politics are so low that it doesn’t really matter.
That’s the problem….it doesn’t matter. So, the next time a Democrat in power doesn’t honor their commitment (and they will), the GOP will whine (as they typically do) but have no legitimate leg to stand on. Someone will simply say (just as they are now)…rewind the tape please.
Although there are a number, one of the most sad and notable contradictions is from Lindsey Graham, chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee. He actually said…”…if an opening comes in the last year of President Trump’s term, and the primary process has started, we’ll wait until the next election,”…followed by…”you can play my words back to me”. They’ve surely honored his request and highlighted his pure hypocrisy.
Yes, that quote by Graham is a good example, but there are many others — on both sides.
The bottom line is that they do what they can get away with, then they invent stories to explain / justify it.
I agree but think there’s a more fundamental bottom line…the American people allow them to get away with lies and hypocrisy…even with something as blatant as Graham. It doesn’t get any clearer than that. Accountability seems to be dead!
Saying that accountability is dead is one way to interpret it. Another way is to assume that a majority knows and accepts the idea that talk and actions are two different things, and the talk is just a game for political TV shows.
I’ve met some people from Eastern Europe who seem to have embraced that view of their politicians. They view all the talk as just a silly nonsense, and they pay attention to what they do.
But talk can be action. A case in point would be Trump saying that Covid is a hoax and then that it is a minor concern when he knows damned well that it is very real and very dangerous. When the commander-in-chief tells the public not to worry, that is action.
Another way is to assume that a majority knows and accepts the idea that talk and actions are two different things, and the talk is just a game for political TV shows.
Although this happens, it’s a rationalization. It opens the door for politicians not being held accountable for their words. I suspect that if politicians were held accountable for their talk, their actions would align more closely. Even scarier is when their actions are worse than their rhetoric…especially with issues like a life-threatening virus.
It’s a joke that they are still called Supreme Court “Justices”. Since the founding of this country, the highest court has morphed into nothing more than a diversity tribunal designed to rubber-stamp the prejudices of one party or the other. If Trump were to nominate a non-partisan Originalist (unlikely), that candidate would be mercilessly ‘Borked’ into retirement during the confirmation hearings.