Controversial Supreme Pick Policies

As much as they say 2020 is laced with controversy, and that this Supreme vacancy is controversial, I beg to differ with that hogwash.

This is not controversial at all. RBG passed away under a Trump Presidency and he has the duty to nominate a replacement. Very simple. Maybe they don’t like that.

Then the Constitution gives the Senate the power of Advice and Consent. (we might bicker at some other times a little over advise vs. advice)

“[The President] shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the Supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.”

But we have had over 100 days of riots against the Constitution. The violence spread to major cities across America. Or as I call them, anti-peace rallies. We heard that voice of hate and anti-Americanism, loud and clear.

We heard the voices of the left when they promised to stack and pack the Supreme Court with ideological clones of the Left when they get the opportunity. We heard it clear.

We heard them when they said the Constitutional Electoral College process for elections has to go. We heard them vote for mob rule every chance they got. We heard them support rioting radicals in Seattle and Oregon, and defend it all as peaceful protesting.

We heard them declaring rioting and looting is some Constitutional right to be respected and allowed to continue. That would stand the First Amendment on its head, but who cares? They want a living, breathing, evolving Constitution as flexibe as Gumby, which will grant them any desire. We heard them, loudly.

And we heard Democrats like Pelosi when they moved forward with and refused to hold a vote on the impeachment in the House. No, no process rules or even the Constitution matters to progressive Leftists disguised as Democrats.

Now we hear threats from Schumer and Pelosi if they don’t get their way. Remember Schumer at the steps of the Supreme Court shaking his fist to the crowd, making personal threats at justices to give us what we want, or else there will be hell or impeachment.

“I want to tell you, Gorsuch, I want to tell you, Kavanaugh, you have released the whirlwind and you will pay the price. You won’t know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions. We will tell President Trump and Senate Republicans, who have stacked the court with right-wing ideologues, that you will be gone in November, and you’ll never be able to do this again.” — Schumer, Roll Call, March 5, 2020

So their voices were heard. In fact, Leftists’ screams are so loud you can barely hear anything else. Give the people a say, they tell us now. But the people had their say in 2016, and again in 2018, on Supreme Court issues. They didn’t like it.

And Democrats ignored it, then refused to accept the results of that election. Voices matter! Votes matter as well. And, like Obama said, elections have consequences.

So now, in view of Trump doing his duty and McConnell’s Senate following through, they tell us there will be consequences if they don’t get their way. Their threats are loud and clear; we hear them too. But we’ve already had the summer of riots. We’ve already had countless threats how these Leftists want to “bring down the whole thing.”

We’ve had them attack law and order for months with defunding and abolishing police schemes. They have carried the banner of Resistance down a flame-lit road to sedition, for 4 years. Do you think rules, laws or even the Constitution mean anything to these people?

They told us they will change the whole structure of the Supreme Court to favor the Left and will abolish the Electoral College. They’ll alter Senate rules. They proved they would run over or destroy anyone in their way by cancel culture or any means possible.

However, they lecture us on following some mythical rules that don’t even exist. We are told that we have no choice on socialism or commie agendas.(even the environment supports it, they claim) And they don’t want to honor the people’s voice on that. Just do it. No referendums, no votes, no public discussions about it. And they threaten us that, if we don’t accept it, they will burn the whole thing down if they don’t get their way.

Against a dark backdrop of the season of hate, and with fierce resistance from the Left on everything, it must seem radical then for Republicans to be doing exactly what they should Constitutionally be doing.

Only Democrats and media could turn that into a miscarriage of justice or controversy.

On Scalia, Obama had the power to nominate, which he did. But the Republican-controlled Senate had the power of advice and consent, which they exercised. All fairly benign, except to the toxic liberal minds.

Should we be surprised Democrats, unbound by Constitutional limits or law, would do “anything necessary” to get and keep power? Their oath means nothing since they believe in a future Utopia, foreign to this Constitution, while hating everything in the present.

The good news is that I’ve been hearing how many Dems have taken the initiative to Walk Away from the Democrat plantation, disgusted. We hear you!

Right Ring | Bullright | © 2020

RBG To Refried Beans

Ruth Bader Ginsburg died, just like she wrote in many stinging opinions, in dissent.

She sat on a seat during a president who was not of her political preference. She was in dissent with the executive branch and president. That was her opinion, okay.

But she had time and opportunity to leave under Obama’s regime, who could have replaced her with a suitable radical jurist. No she was in dissent on leaving then.

Now news comes out about a statement made to her granddaughter saying:”my fervent wish is to not be replaced until a new president is installed.” Once again, in dissent..

Dying wish trumps all?

Who is she to get that say? She had her say and voice when she did not retire despite her health. In dissent all the way. Now she appears to be crying out in dissent.

Yet in 2016, she wanted the nomination and confirmation process to go forward to replace Antonin Scalia, who was her ideological opponent as well as her good friend. Why can’t we use her own words then, as she is now, in dissent?

Didn’t she know of Scalia’s fervent desires about such things? Surely she knew he would not want to be replaced by Obama. She would have known that. But she said replace him under that president, even as he was termed-out and leaving office in months.

No, she was gung ho about ramming a nominee through to replace Scalia, despite the Senate being in Republican hands. Under the bus you go, good friend.(nothing personal)

That should have told us something there. Or is all that only refried beans now? She was in dissent then as she is in dissent now. Friends like that who needs enemies?

 

See also on the topic:

RBG told Senate in 2016 to do ‘their job,’ replace Scalia before election: report — NY Post

“There’s nothing in the Constitution that says the president stops being the president in his last year,” Ginsburg told the New York Times in 2016 when she urged the Senate to do “their job” and consider President Obama’s court nominee Merrick Garland.

Right Ring | Bullright | © 2020

RBG Explained

In the absence of any detailed information about the health of Ruth Bader Ginsburg, I’ve taken it upon myself, as explainer of all things, to provide what I’m sure is a perfectly plausible explanation. No problemo.

Here’s the report from SCOTUS

There, we have the symptoms: fever and chills sparked hospital visit. IV treatment.

1)First of all, it is now late fall and she has finally realized this. Even in DC near winter, people get chills. It’s quite natural. Chills will remain among us throughout the season.

2)Then there is the fever thing. Well, this was impeachment week, after all. Most Democrats in the country have Impeachment Fever right now. That’s no secret.

So I think we can definitely see the rational cause and effect here.

On the other hand, while we are at it, the “fear” conspiracy theories of the left, based on what SCOTUS would be like if she left, are completely unsubstantiated. I’m still looking for the source of those.

I’m glad to be of assistance.
Yours Truly

BTW: I haven’t determined a rational explanation for Epstein’s death yet.