The Senate Should Ignore Barrett Supreme Court Nomination Or Something

See, there was a time when there were plenty of squishy Republicans who would listen to the very same media who hated them, because they wanted to be liked and be that “get along go along” type of politician. Think ones like John McCain, Susan Collins, and Lisa Murkowski. While some are still squishy, there are plenty enough, with Cocaine Mitch McConnell driving them, who stand strong. But, the Washington Post will still try shame them

The Senate should ignore Amy Coney Barrett’s nomination

THIS EDITORIAL is not about Amy Coney Barrett. No matter whom President Trump had picked to fill the late Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s Supreme Court seat, it would be the wrong choice — because it is the wrong time. Mr. Trump is asking Senate Republicans to perpetrate a damaging injustice by ramming through a nominee on the eve of a presidential election. This move threatens to sully the court and aggravate suspicions over the coming election. Senate Republicans should be disgusted at playing the role they are being asked to play. But so far they seem shameless in their hypocrisy and wanton in their willingness to poison the workings of our democracy.

Followed by lots of whining about Merrick Garland. They haven’t quite figured out how to attack Barrett herself, so, they’re attempting to sway Republican Senators into refusing to vote, knowing full well that if GOP Senators refuse to vote for Barrett the number of GOP voters will decline precipitously, which could cause Trump to lose and those Senators to lose, along with quite a few House seats and State elected positions.

The question is, will the media take their usual role of attacking Barrett? It could be dangerous. Newt Gingrich notes

Since President Ronald Reagan nominated Judge Robert Bork to replace Justice Lewis Powell on the Supreme Court in 1987, the Democrats have followed a policy of harshness and ruthlessness in going after Republican Supreme Court nominees.

The assault on Bork – a scholarly and widely respected conservative member of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit – was so vicious and underhanded that the process of personal destruction came to be known as “borking.” In fact, the savaging of Judge Bork was so infamous the Oxford English Dictionary added the verb “bork” as U.S. political slang: “[To] obstruct (someone, especially a candidate for public office) by  systematically defaming or vilifying them.”

The chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee while Bork was being slandered was Joe Biden. A report was issued known as the Biden Report, and Bork later said every word in it was false.

This was the same approach Democratic senators took against nominee Clarence Thomas when he was nominated to the Supreme Court. It was also a ruthless personal assault – and the Senate Judiciary Committee chairman, again, was Biden.

Do the Dems want to try this with Barrett?

Now, with the nomination of Judge Barrett, the Democrats face a real dilemma. Judge Barrett is incredibly smart, has an impressive career, and is well-known as a caring, compassionate person.

She graduated magna cum laude from Rhodes College, and then graduated first in her class at Notre Dame Law School. (snip)

Judge Barrett is going to come across as professional, knowledgeable and likable. By all rights, she should be considered a remarkable, inspirational figure to all Americans regardless of political leanings (and especially to young women).

The dilemma for the Democrats is they have to decide whether they will try to destroy her (as they tried with Bork, Thomas, and Kavanaugh) or to concede that she is unacceptable for liberals but acceptable (indeed preferable) to most Americans.

Do they want to let Diane Feinstein off the leash, and she looked bad with Kavanaugh, as well as some Dems saying she’s not up to a confirmation hearing, plus, her previous attacks on Barrett’s religion and Catholicism overall when Barrett was confirmed as a federal judge, or do they want to let Joe Biden’s VP nominee Kamala Harris, who was also shameless during the Kavanaugh hearings, lead the smears? Or just say “I don’t agree” and yield their time? Will they focus on abortion on demand, the number one sacrament of the Dem Party? It’s dangerous ground for the Dems

Amy Coney Barrett is the ultimate Walmart soccer mom

The biggest takeaway from the 2016 presidential election was that Main Street America was so sick of elites in Washington DC telling them how to live that they elected a politically inexperienced, trash-talking billionaire from New York City to ‘drain the swamp’. While some suburban women appear to have tired of Donald Trump’s style, there is little evidence that the mass of voters who sent that message regret their decision, especially in key states like Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. (snip)

Trump’s nomination of Amy Coney Barrett will do far more than just supercharge hardcore pro-life and pro-choice voters and impact future judicial decisions. Barrett’s nomination will bring many disaffected suburban women back into the Trump fold and greatly increase his chances of again carrying key Midwestern states. This effect will occur for two reasons.

First, Democrats and their liberal-progressive allies won’t be able to resist a full-on assault on Barrett and her family, which will turn-off Midwest suburban women far more than Trump’s past tweets. Before Trump even nominated Barrett, they launched their preemptive strike against Barrett by tying her Catholic faith to the dystopian _Handmaid’s Tale_ where women are subjugated by men, which seemed an odd attack given Barrett’s appointment would make her one of the most powerful women in the world. (snip)

The second and more important reason Barrett’s nomination will bring many suburban women back into the fold is entirely due to who she is. Many women will view Barrett as a regular suburban mom just like them. This is where Barrett’s biography is deadly to Democratic attack lines: small-town, middle America, Catholic, teacher, mother of seven, with two kids adopted from Haiti after a devasting hurricane and one kid with Down’s Syndrome. Demonizing any part of her biography inherently demonizes thousands of other women sharing that same trait or who will find nothing but goodness in Barrett’s biography.

How will it look with coastal Elites in the Dem party attacking her? Read the whole article.