Tuesday, April 4, 2017


This post is very weird for me because my reasoning for each statement above goes against what I believe to be best.  But the battle has brought about this result.  In terms of Neil Gorsuch being qualified for the Supreme Court, he is.  I personally believe he is more of a centrist than the late Justice Scalia was, so other than settling the score over the obstructionist Republican tactic against Merrick Garland I am at a loss for why the Democrats are turning this into a show down.

Out of this mess we see Gorsuch's dishonesty.  Every court of appeals judge knows we have a judicial crisis because of the filibuster rule.  Far too many nominees walk away from the process.  There are far too many federal judicial openings.   In Texas we have trial court and court of appeals openings since 2011/12.  Gorsuch knows his nomination is only inflaming the situation.  If he cared about the institution, which he does not, he would withdraw his name from nomination.  

The institution is always far more important than any one person.  This is lost on Gorsuch.  This is why although I have no problem with him being on the Supreme Court especially since I think he is more to the middle than the late Justice Scalia, I am concerned with his sense of loyalty to the institution.


So although I have no problem with Gorsuch as a Supreme Court Justice, the battle has forced me to assess his sense of loyalty to the institution.  This brings me to my second contradiction.  I have written extensively that the filibuster is unconstitutional.  The constitution only requires 51 votes, not 60.  The Senate can write rules which manage the Senate, but they cannot write rules which change the constitutional limitations on the Senate.  And please do not post the Wikileak commentary on the issue, it fails to distinguish between a basic rule versus using rule making as a way to amend the constitutional limitations on the Senate.

So while I will personally be happy to see the filibuster take a death nail over the Gorsuch nomination, I believe the Democrats are using limited political capital to no end.  Gorsuch is going to get through and the tone in the Senate will go very hostile.  This is only going to send more people away from the Democrats.  The middle which decides elections do not get why all of this drama is necessary.

In my view the Democrats are going to be the big losers if the filibuster is killed by the Senate, although I will be very happy.


The Republicans are still moving forward to find a compromise among Republicans to change the ACA.  Moderate Republicans have put out an olive leaf to moderate Democrats to come up with a solution.  The Democrats being just plain stupid have said no.  My view on all of this is very consistent.  If you have no solutions, then you do not belong in elective office.  This has been my theme concerning the city elections.

The Democrats sitting back and doing nothing rather than try and sit down with moderate Republicans to find a bipartisan solution, which will be welcomed by the American people, are rolling the dice the ACA fails and the Republicans will be blamed.  Good luck with that one, because I will be blaming the Democrats for sitting on the sidelines and not even trying to work with the moderate Republicans.

Donald Trump is a vindictive prick.  If the moderate Republicans go to him with a solution with enough bipartisan votes to get it through Trump is going to tell the Freedom Caucus where to shove it.  What we need a a caucus of moderate Republicans and Democrats to form a working government with Trump.  Here is a news flash for you, Trump cares more about saying he won than about specific policy.  

No comments: