A validation of policy

"You don’t get much littler than the Little Sisters of the Poor."

Timothy Carney writes in USA Today,

When Democrats talk about being for the little guy, they often mean being for government power.

Carney correctly observes that Democrats have been pounding Neil Gorsuch for not being sufficiently "for the little guy. He then lists a couple of cases when Gorsuch was clearly on the side of the little guy.

...Gorsuch once wrote, “A judge who likes every result he reaches is very likely a bad judge, reaching for results he prefers rather than those the law compels.”

And here we see the most important way Gorsuch is the friend of the little guy: He upholds the rule of law, and the rule of law is the little guy’s best friend.

...The rule of law doesn’t care if you’re powerful or powerless; it applies to all. Gorsuch has spent his years on the bench reading the law and applying it, without animus or favor. That’s bad news for those, such as New London’s mandarins or the Obama administration’s HHS, who want special treatment. It’s good news for the little guy.

Democrats strategy on Gorsuch

Sundance provides us with this delicious close-up of Senator Chuck Schumer, who

“urges his colleagues to vote no”; where “urging colleagues” means get in line, or else. Thus setting the stage for a filibuster, well, that would be, if all 48 Democrat Senators follow the compliance demand.

Therein lies the outline of the very tenuous Democrat strategy against Gorsuch: Force Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to use the nuclear option to pass Altar Boy Gorsuch to the Supreme Court with 51 votes instead of 60.


Obviously, if 8 Democrat Senators vote to confirm Judge Gorsuch – Schumer will have been rebuked. Those Democrats will have their offices moved to the never cleaned bathroom stall at the end of the cellar (ie. no-financial DNC support for their reelection bids).

Senator Schumer is not “technically” calling for a filibuster, that would be impolitic, audacious, undiplomatic and transparent to the national electorate. So Senator Schumer instead “urges his colleagues” to vote no. Same/Same.

However, accepting all reasonableness is now cast asunder in favor of political posturing, if his colleagues comply they run the very real risk of seeing nomination #2 (Kennedy’s replacement), and nomination #3 (Ginsburg’s replacement), also reduced to nothing more than a 51-vote-threshold.

Read more here.

Schumer to vote against Gorsuch, and urges all Democrats to do the same

Alexander Bolton reports at The Hill,

Senate Democratic Leader Charles Schumer (N.Y.) says he will oppose Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch and urge fellow Democrats to do the same.

Schumer announced Thursday that Democrats will filibuster Gorsuch and force Republicans to muster 60 votes to advance him to a final up-or-down vote.

“He will have to earn 60 votes for confirmation. My vote will be no, and I urge my colleagues to do the same,” he said on the Senate floor.


Republicans have threatened to change the Senate’s filibuster rule to exempt Supreme Court nominees from procedural gridlock — a controversial tactic often referred to as the "nuclear option" that Democrats deployed in 2013 to protect Cabinet and lower-court judges from filibusters.

Read more here.

Gorsuch a conservative? Read this!

People on the right have been rejoicing about Trump's pick for the Supreme Court, Neil Gorsuch. This article in The Hill might give them pause.

"The professional swamp dwellers, and those who sell the swamp uniparty messages"

At the Conservative Treehouse, Sundance tries again to educate us. His subject today is Senator Dick Blumenthal of Connecticut and Judge Gorsuch.

sundance writes,

The professional swamp dwellers, and those who sell the swamp uniparty messages, are intensely skilled at creating false impressions. The example of swamp-master Dick Blumenthal and his like-minded political ilk is just the most recent example.

Senator Dick knows Judge Gorsuch is in that tenuous confirmation space where he cannot respond to any claim made by political opposition about his words, their use and phrases.

Senator Dick can say anything he wants, Gorsuch has no venue to retort.

Senator Dick knows this position of compromise puts Dick’s team at an advantage. Thus Team Dick can say anything they want, and Team Dick’s political opponents are hamstrung.

This is the context to consider anything coming from the mouth of Dick, or any oppositional entity who monitor the swamp and advocate on behalf of those dwelling therein; ie. ‘the mostly swamp media’ (MSM). The swamp sellers can then run with Team Dick’s statements to create a useful narrative of division against their opposition.

Read more here.

No such club ever existed

In today's Chapter One of Fake News, The New York Post and the Daily Mail both have egg on their faces. The Daily Mail reported, "DailyMail.com reveals how Gorsuch set up a club called 'Fascism Forever' at his prep school outside D.C. in protest at staff's left-wing tendencies. The New York Post then piggybacked on the story. Ed Whelan reports at National Review, that the high school states that no such club ever existed.

Earth to newspaper reporters: High-school yearbook editors sometimes have a sophomoric sense of humor. I am reliably informed that no such club ever existed and that there was instead an inside joke among friends in the senior class that parodied political debates happening at the school. A contemporary of Gorsuch’s at the school also tells me that yearbook editors added stuff to student blurbs without their permission. All of this also leads me to doubt the yearbook’s claim that Gorsuch was a “Believer in The World According to Ward.” Update: Gorsuch’s high school confirms what should have been obvious to everyone: that no such club ever existed and that the yearbook blurb was tongue-in-cheek.

Read more here.

Scalia, Gorsuch, Colorado! What's not to like?

A classy President chooses a classy judge!