Normalizing radical behavior
On Saturday Chuck Schumer repeated Mitch McConnell's remarks following the death of Justice Anthony Scalia, word for word. Unfortunately most folks who do not immerse themselves into politics may have not noticed the intended sarcasm delivered by the minority leader. Certainly the press had no intention of making a blazing headline about it. The owners of the media would not at all approve. The Republican Party is unscrupulous. They will do whatever it takes to grab and hold on to power. Hopefully women, as if they need more incentive, will rally around the passing of Ruth Bader Ginsburg and what she meant to women's reproductive rights and vote these criminals out of the White House and Congress.
There don't seem to be any consequences for them. What can we do?
Why does the DC press normalize Republican excesses while treating any Democratic moves as somehow radical? Is it that they are too chummy with Republicans?
Mitch McConnell is going to regret this. He’s emboldened people who didn’t even care about the courts to get active to elect Democrats, and driven Democratic fundraising to unprecedented levels. On top of that, he’s all but guaranteed Joe Biden and the Democratic majority in the House and Senate will add SCOTUS Justices to the court to make it more representative. Republicans have signed their own death warrant for at least a generation with every short-sighted move they’ve made in the last year.
The Avett Brothers are one of my favorites. Great song choice. “With victory, I accept defeat.” It should be Mitch McConnell’s theme song.
The DC press corps, and the establishment media somewhat (but insufficiently) less so, have been let’s say overly supportive of the GOP since at least Reagan’s election. The coverage of the firing of the air traffic controllers and destruction of their union is a great example. And things have only gotten worse since. If you doubt me, ask yourself when was the last time the mainstream has acted like they did with Watergate and Vietnam. You know the answer: mid-1970s.
At the moment, my gut is that Trump’s replacement for RBG will be confirmed in the blink of an eye with no more than a day or two of perfunctory hearings at most. And with that person on the bench before the election, the POTUS election will be fully rigged. Six judges who put party and special interests above nation and the rule of law. All Trump has to do is get a case to SCOTUS and it’ll be Gore v. Bush II. The good news is that that tactic will in all likelihood apply to the POTUS race. In every other race, we will be free to — and must — vote out every Republican. Seriously. That’s what’s needed.
What Democrats CAN do after McConnell scorches the earth is take the White House & Senate and, with the House, bum rush that "red line" of finances and follow ALL the $, everywhere it leads. McConnell may be willing to go all in on SCOTUS but let's make sure Mrs. McConnell is collateral damage when the swamp is really and truly drained (and prosecuted and sentenced; THIS is why Kamala...)
In agreement with so many of the astute comments here, I would add that, under the horse race rubric, cable news outlets especially are motivated to amplify any sense of helplessness, outrage or anxiety in their viewers. They want you to think the GOP are this Borg-like menace, because it's great sci-fi drama, ultimately ratings gold. *["Resistance is futile" is the Borg motto, for non-StarTrek enthusiasts.]
I see that the big papers are front-paging the profiles of Trump's potential nominees, as if all is normal and it is time for everyone to be choosing which one they favor. Somehow, I do not feel at all normal.
ps. I love me some Charlie Pierce.
President Obama was “picking a fight” in that he was asking the Republican Senate to do part of their job they found distasteful.
Trump is not picking a fight because he’s only asking the Republican Senate to roll over the Democrats. Again.
As I recall, some 250 Republican Judges have been confirmed already. Scarce half-a-dozen of the least qualified have been rejected.
Trump’s & McConnell’s actions are completely consistent with prior actions.
This “fight” was picked a long time ago.
A conservative friend pointed out that Mitch McConnell made several statements during interviews in 2016, 17, etc. I checked since this was news to me and it seems to be true.
Their rational for this rush to replace RBG is since the 1880's (historical precedent McConnell & Romey call it) any SC nomination made in an election year while both the Senate & POTUS were of opposing parties resulted is no confirmation.
Honest question. Is there anything to this or is it just a convenient way to explain away the press & public questions?
Thank you, Eric, for this brilliant take down. I called both my Senators today (Portman and Brown) about the nomination and the forced sterilizations in Georgia. I was so upset I was sputtering.