Follow Dr. Waddy

Tragically, Google has suspended the service that allows blog readers to subscribe by email to the blogs of their choice. This means that, in order to keep up with all the WaddyIsRight excitement, you might want to add "WaddyIsRight.com" to your favorites and visit this site OBSESSIVELY! I can't think of any better use of your time, can you? Alternatively, send me an email at nlwaddy@yahoo.com and I will try to get you subscribed from my end.

Saturday, September 19, 2020

SCOTUS Pandemonium!

 

Friends, the speculation and gamemanship following in the wake of the death of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg has already reached a crescendo, and it hasn't even been a day since RBG passed away!  Hold on to your hats, America.


Here is some analysis from our good friends at Fox News.


Trump, for his part, seems determined to move forward ASAP:


https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-urges-republicans-fill-ginsburg-vacancy-without-delay

 

Some Republican Senators, on the other hand, especially if they're facing reelection, might be more circumspect about the process:

 

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ginsburg-vacancy-puts-pressure-on-trump-critic-republicans-in-senate 


Democrats, meanwhile, are anxious, to say the least, and they're already contemplating extreme reactions, if a Trump nominee is confirmed:


https://www.foxnews.com/politics/markey-pack-supreme-court-abolish-filibuster-ginsburg

 

https://www.foxnews.com/media/ginsburg-death-burn-it-down-threats 


Finally, we still face the likelihood of a contested election, which the Supreme Court would be called upon to referee.  Now that court is down to just eight Justices.  What does that portend for the outcome of the election?


https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ginsburg-vacancy-could-complicate-possible-contested-election-some-say

 

My take?  My preliminary reaction is that Trump and the GOP must choose a replacement for Ginsburg, but we need not be in a rush to fill the seat before the election.  Ramming a nominee through the Senate could complicate the reelection of critical GOP Senators, after all.  If the battle is over before the election takes place, moreover, it also removes the impetus for some Republicans and conservatives to vote.  The important thing is that we confirm a new and reliably conservative, constitutionalist Justice soon, meaning before any major cases involving a contested election are weighed by the Court.  What that means to me is that we can start the process ASAP, but a vote in the Senate need not come until the middle of November, at the earliest.

 

In terms of the election itself, obviously this turn of events raises the stakes -- as if they needed to be raised any higher!  In truth, though, I feel as though RBG's passing will energize Republicans and conservatives.  It seems to me that progressives and Trump-haters were already energized -- not by Biden, of course, but by the opportunity to "get" Trump.  Republicans and conservatives, however, are not united around Trump.  Most are, but some are clearly tempted to sit out the election or to hold their noses and vote for Biden.  This Supreme Court nomination battle should crystallize for them why, even if they don't always approve of Trump, we need a conservative majority, and hopefully an expanded conservative majority, on the Court -- and thus we need Trump to win!  My gut tells me that these unforeseen developments will help bring some malingering conservatives, reluctant to do their duty and vote for DJT, "home" to the GOP.  We shall see. 


P.S. You must read this great article about the widespread nature of BLM protests and the frequency with which they have degenerated into violence.  It really puts paid to the notion that BLM is pacific in its methods.


https://thefederalist.com/2020/09/16/study-up-to-95-percent-of-2020-u-s-riots-are-linked-to-black-lives-matter/

12 comments:

  1. Well, my first comment got wiped out...so let's try again. As it stands right now, SCOTUS is 4-4. They can not successfully rule fairly, can they if the presidency is contested? Just asking. Next is the Senate. I see turncoat Lindsey Graham has now changed his tune (wonder of wonders), I see Collins and Murkowski (why call yourself a Republican?) are def. no's. So, who does that leave in the Senate? Romney? Loeffler also as no's? There was one more, can't think of his name. I'm telling you, button up buttercup. It will become very nasty.

    That is a great article that was written about the BLM. "The cause of violence is the people who have chosen to be violent." Very true. Furthur down in the article she touches on the lack of police response. I think the police are often told to stand down, as they were in Seattle and Portland.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. LINDA

      If you and your husband want to really understand what the BLM are really all about, I strongly suggest that the get hold of a copy of a 1970 book written by Tom Wolfe titled "Radical Chic & Mau-mauing the Flak Catchers" and read it. It's worth your time.

      Yep, read it long ago, so when BLM came along I said "Yep, Black Panthers Come Home to Roost". All this, compliments of our wealthy elite Leftists and their counter parts in the entertainment industry, and elsewhere, meaning the media and academia, literally. Do yourself a favor and read this book, or at least a synopsis of it.

      "Burn Baby Burn" is the motto of the BLM, or should be. The Black Panthers were always dedicated to violence. Nothing new here, except more violence brought to you by the same mob who brought it to you over 50 years ago.

      Delete
    2. LINDA

      Maybe it's time for another Frank Rizzo. Now there was a guy who knew how to handle The Black Panthers. He also knew how to crack down on White Leftists.

      Delete
  2. Dr.Waddy et al: I think our SCOTUS count now is 5-3 in our favor. If SCOTUS plays a role in the post "election" hurly burly it does give the lawful America an advantage against the"anything goes as long as it goes our way" far left. As I remember, in 2000 the critical case was appealed directly to SCOTUS from the Florida Supreme Court decision.If Justice Roberts were to have another of his anxiety attacks, and goes rogue, producing a tie,then an as yet undetermined state's judiciary or a Federal District Court could decide the election. Gads, this is going to be dramatic! I rejoice at the discomfiture done to the frail psyches of the left: I see megashrill Madame Pelosi already proposes summary impeachment. I don't blame them ;they are on the bubble and I hope it drives them to frantic distraction. They do deserve it!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Don't forget that FDR tried to "pack" the Supreme Court back in 1937, and expand it to 15 justices, primarily to neutralize those who were hostile to his New Deal programs.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Linda, a couple points of clarification. A 4-4 tie doesn't necessarily mean that the Court is useless. For one thing, it's 5-3, in terms of conservatives versus liberals, so we might get a sympathetic hearing. You never know. For another thing, in the case of a tie, the decision of the appeals court that ruled before the Supremes would stand. Thus, you can bet that election challenges will be filed by the Dems and the GOP in whichever circuit they view as friendly. What that means, I presume, is numerous challenges in multiple circuits. Pandemonium, in other words, but even a 4-4 Court might be able to decide which cases to hear and which to leave be. In addition, I heard today that there is precedent for the President making a recess appointment to the Supreme Court. In other words, the tie-breaking vote could potentially be cast by a temporary Justice chosen by Trump! Lastly, I wouldn't count Collins, Murkowski, Romney, et al. as definite "no" votes. They might prefer to wait until after the election, sure. What else are they going to say? The vote itself might or might not happen before the election, however. Even if it does happen before the election, if the nominee is strong they might find it hard to vote no. The Dems will unleash all the hounds of hell on whomever the nominee is, and that might, just might, lead to a backlash against their destructive, ad hominem tactics. It happened before with Kavanaugh, and he was a white male, after all: the lowest of the low. The nominee to come is likely to be coated in feminine (and possibly Hispanic) Teflon. Very helpful!

    Ray, you're right -- there's nothing new under the sun. BLM isn't innovative in the least. Their views are similar to those of the Black Panthers, yes -- but one might also see them as simply the obverse of the KKK. Same difference.

    Jack's summary of the situation with the Court tracks closely with my own. I think the upshot is this: neither side can feel safe in the assumption that it will be "saved" from an election loss by a sympathetic judiciary. The judiciary obviously leans right...but it probably also loathes Trump. An election decided by the courts is something of a coin-flip!

    Ray, yes -- FDR contemplated court-packing, but even he didn't have the stomach for it, and nor did his Democratic pals in Congress. Of course, those were different times. Be that as it may, I don't regard Dem threats of court-packing as overly serious. If they get a majority in the Senate -- a big IF -- it will be razor-thin, and a couple of defections would scupper the whole enterprise.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Dr.Waddy et al: I remember a crime movie in which the prosecutor answered the criminals' plea for mercy by urging the jury "DENY it them!" Our ready answer to the real America, in response to a far left which has made plain it's determination to use "any means necessary" to force totalitarianism on us and now demands "fair play". . . Deny it them!

    ReplyDelete
  6. Quite right, Jack. There's nothing "moral" about surrender, which is the only attitude in Republicans that the Dems find redeeming. We Trumpers and Republicans should just accept that the Left will always despise us -- and get on with the business of beating them.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Dr.Waddy et Al from Jack: Perhaps enduring victory for us and the salvation of the real America from the 50+ year leftist onslaught, is at hand,if we will but reach for and vote for the President!

    ReplyDelete
  8. Dr.Waddy et Al from Jack: The denial to the presumptuous, elitist left of their long time haven, SCOTUS, will have salubrious consequences well beyond President Trump's heroic terms. It will mark the return of the rule of law and common sense and the disempowerment of those who would "fundamentally transform" a nation which does not need such radical change. Well ordered and well conceived progress would again prevail and the terribly bizarre interlude which started in the '60's, would end.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Dr.Waddy from Jack: Let John L. Lewis's jubilant battle cry be ours; this President exemplifies it, for us! "They smote me hip and thigh and right merrily did I return their blows!". After decades of rinoism, retreat, apology and unrequited compromise, finally we have a President who sees these bastards for what they are and is blithe,again for our sakes, to stymie them.If we, the real America,support him to the full he and we will win; if we fluff we will have needlessly and irredeemably surrendered to guaranteed totalitarian hell.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Jack, you're right: victory IS at hand! Arguably, it was in 2018 too -- and we flubbed it. Let's not make that mistake again!

    I agree that winning control of SCOTUS is pivotal, but it's not the final word in American politics and culture. Assuming we add another conservative Justice, the Dems COULD engage in court-packing in the future. They could get away with it too, if America lets them. The only real safety for our Republic and way of life, therefore, lies in fundamentally altering the nature of the media, the Democratic Party, our education system, and, yes, the judiciary. Ultimately, we need to win the culture wars. The Supreme Court is a secondary front in a long, complex struggle.

    ReplyDelete