Leftist, or at least left-ish, senators call him a radical. NARAL claims in commercials that the judge is an opponent of women, which might come as a surprise to the women in the judge's family. The head of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force accuses the judge of having "a political and legal ideology that is antithetical to an America that embraces all, including lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people . . . a mortal danger to equal rights for gay people, reproductive freedom and affirmative action." A mortal danger!
And, as the Nazi said in The Blues Brothers ("I hate Illinois Nazis"), this guy is also . . . a Cath-o-lic.
All that was what they said about Chief Justice John Roberts during his confirmation hearings in 2005. Sound familiar?
Flash forward to this year, and this nomination. Is there anything new in the Democrats' playbook? Is every nominee to the Supreme Court--if a Republican president's nominee--a threat to not only the American way of life, but civilization?
It appears so. And we ain't kidding.
Nancy Pelosi, that font of fuzzy thinking, said the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh to the U.S. Supreme Court was "a clear and disrespectful assault on the fundamental rights of women and on the quality, affordable health care of the American people." But one gets the feeling she would have said that about any nominee.
Chuck Schumer, for his part, says, "The ramifications of this battle will last a generation or more. I'm going to fight this nomination with everything I've got." Which is 49 votes.
One senator from California, Dianne Feinstein, is always good for a laugh in these matters. Maybe the only unfunny thing is that she actually gets a vote. The other day she said the president's nominee could "eviscerate women's freedoms for generations." Note well: She said this before Brett Kavanaugh's name was announced. Why wait when you know what you're going to say? Call her efficient, maybe even clairvoyant.
The opposition party's scorched-earth tactics were as predictable as they are loathsome.
Except . . . the only things we've heard about Judge Brett Kavanaugh's career is that he's a model of self-control and restraint. He's et up with restraint. He wouldn't run a yellow light.
The man has 300 opinions to his name--and nary a one that got him kicked off the short list. He's already served a dozen years on the federal appeals court that's a regular farm team for the Supreme Court. As a much younger man, he clerked for the justice he hopes to replace.
He coaches his daughters' basketball teams. They call him Coach K.
The guy is a true conservative, but like Mike Huckabee used to say, he's not mad about it. He's a family man with a great story. Vox said he's right out of "central casting" for Supreme Court nominees. The only thing the Democrats have is what they'd say about any nominee made by this president. They have nothing specifically to tie their opposition to. Every statement the minority's leadership makes, was written two weeks ago.
But oppose they will. For what they think is a good reason: Unlike Neil Gorsuch replacing Antonin Scalia, Brett Kavanaugh would be replacing a swing vote on the court. So take Chuck Schumer at his word: He's going to fight this nomination with everything he's got. Including, we'd suppose, an onslaught on the man's character, predictions of calamity, hinting of maltreatment of established law and the signaling of an America without civil rights or modern, common sense. All while a good man's family and friends, not to mention the rest of America, looks on.
If Chuck Schumer gets his way ("everything I've got"), these hearings might be more like Clarence Thomas' than Elena Kagan's. The country might be worse for it in the future, but Chuck Schumer has his party to think about.
Speaking of Elena Kagan, she was confirmed 63-37 in 2010.
Sonia Sotomayor 68-31.
Stephen Breyer 87-9.
Ruth Bader Ginsburg 96-3.
But then again, those nominations didn't come during a Republican administration. So that makes this a whole 'nother animal, don't it?
Editorial on 07/13/2018