Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

DonCoquixote

(13,647 posts)
59. thank you for this post
Tue Mar 21, 2017, 03:48 PM
Mar 2017

Last edited Wed Mar 22, 2017, 11:57 AM - Edit history (1)

to the author of the original OP, what I'm going to say is going to sound harsh, but I don't mean it that way. Normalizing Neil is deadly. Yes he is very much not a clown like Trump, that is exactly what makes him deadly. The Heritage foundation picked him, and they knew that they want someone who, even if Trump crashed the clown car in the Washington Monument,, would be slick enough to last and not be challenged. They picked this young, smart, charming fellow who just happens to believe that corporations should be only do whatever the hell they want to their employees and that agencies should not be able to do anything to protect people. Let's not forget, the whole reason of the Chevron ruling, which he opposes, was that when you deal for federal agency, the people who actually are the experts should be deferred to. In other words a judge should not be able to override an astronomer at NASA, a surgeon at the CDC, and other scenarios were frankly you do not want the equivalent of a plumber doing your brain surgery. If Neil gets in, he is going to do his best to make sure that federal agencies have to defer to judges, namely because the judges will be conservative, which means that the billionaires will have already told them what to say or at least made it very clear.

I mean, look at this quote:
In an article titled “Liberals’N’Lawsuits” for National Review, Gorsuch argued that “American liberals have become addicted to the courtroom, relying on judges and lawyers rather than elected leaders and the ballot box, as the primary means of effecting their social agenda on everything from gay marriage to assisted suicide to the use of vouchers for private-school education.”


Let's be attention to the language: he says that liberals have become an "addicted to the courtroom", which coincidentally is the one area where Corporations were and churches can be held accountable. It's no accident he uses the language of addicts, which she of course can easily interpret as criminals, to describe the one area were Corporation can actually lose. He also uses the term "social agenda", as if trying to go ahead and take tax dollars and pay everyone from private Christian schools to private prison companies is not some sort of social agenda. This is a person who does not believe that people who have been failed by their elected leaders, and yes failed at the ballot box, should have any defense. This is not someone we want on the Supreme Court, and yes Trump could've picked a fire breather, but the fact this guy is wrapped in some sort of slick package again makes them more dangerous because we do not pay attention to the actual words he says. Those words will outlive him, they will outlive us, and thereby probably shorten the lives of our children and grandchildren!

No normalizing Neil,.! He needs to be opposed, because even if the short-term fight is not one, thanks to be bought and paid for Congress, an honest critique of them will pave the way to where we can and start to help undo the agenda that the GOP is set in motion.

He's a phoney flamingdem Mar 2017 #1
Gorsuch seems to be a smoother version of Scalia. guillaumeb Mar 2017 #2
And possibly further right dhol82 Mar 2017 #6
Did he learn his ethics at his mother's knee? guillaumeb Mar 2017 #9
Yup, there is that. dhol82 Mar 2017 #10
It's the "corporate shill" part that disqualifies him, in my mind. Anti-consumer is not good. SharonAnn Mar 2017 #14
He's a slime BannonsLiver Mar 2017 #3
Oh heavens no, he will do everything Scalia did, but with a smile. Eliot Rosewater Mar 2017 #4
And will go beyond Scalia's conservatism. JudyM Mar 2017 #61
I'm thinking, it could be a lot worse Motley13 Mar 2017 #5
straight shooter or slick as goose shit? spanone Mar 2017 #7
He's too slick. Too cutsie.. Qualified or not, no President under Federal investigation Ninga Mar 2017 #8
Operative word is "seems." WinkyDink Mar 2017 #11
They all make nice and act reasonable during the confirmation process. brush Mar 2017 #12
+Infinity - nt KingCharlemagne Mar 2017 #50
Can you convince him to publicly endorse Merick Garland for the job he's currently nominated for? Jonny Appleseed Mar 2017 #13
He did, sort of--but then said the hearing issue was political and wouldn't comment librechik Mar 2017 #18
I'd say it's a legal issue when a party conspires to directly obstruct articles of the constitution Jonny Appleseed Mar 2017 #21
I agree--whom do we appeal to? librechik Mar 2017 #22
The fact that he stands as a nominee for a vacancy that occurred Tanuki Mar 2017 #41
He'll probably be confirmed, The Velveteen Ocelot Mar 2017 #15
I don't trust him. And we need to avenge Obama's stolen SCOTUS seat. MoonRiver Mar 2017 #16
See here: emulatorloo Mar 2017 #17
His rulings indicate he would be at least as conservative as Scalia, and likely more so. BzaDem Mar 2017 #19
He is to the right of Scalia! How is that ok? He's just better at selling himself. JudyM Mar 2017 #63
my bottom line is--if Gorsuch were really interested in law, he should have recused the nomination librechik Mar 2017 #20
+ a brazillion! All those Republicans on the Trump Train are just opportunists. nt tblue37 Mar 2017 #24
Yes - this FakeNoose Mar 2017 #28
+1 uponit7771 Mar 2017 #67
The only good thing I can say about him is that he writes well. As someone who teaches tblue37 Mar 2017 #23
I just tuned in to watch a few minutes of Sen Durbin questioning Gorsuch SticksnStones Mar 2017 #25
he's a smooth-talking extremist - he's not honest at all, he's a total creep Fast Walker 52 Mar 2017 #26
Here we go. Iggo Mar 2017 #27
Gorsuch is a conservative corporatist, but is unfortunately qualified Freethinker65 Mar 2017 #29
Actually in the last 40 years only repugs have been stopped yeoman6987 Mar 2017 #38
True, but was referring to all nominees, not just Supreme Court. Freethinker65 Mar 2017 #44
Sorry. I miss understood yeoman6987 Mar 2017 #58
This message was self-deleted by its author Kingofalldems Mar 2017 #47
Because Republicans nominate extremists. sharedvalues Mar 2017 #55
I trust nothing MFM008 Mar 2017 #30
I don't trust him. BainsBane Mar 2017 #31
It's not as if we have much choice in the matter. DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2017 #32
+1 n/t librechik Mar 2017 #36
He makes Trump look normal for picking him. If we can not vote him down it might be best to move on. DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2017 #40
Sadly, that is pretty much the bottom line... gilbert sullivan Mar 2017 #56
Reality is a cruel master. DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2017 #57
He was willing to take a nomination.... Thomas Hurt Mar 2017 #33
It doesn't matter what we think. He's going to be confirmed. Vinca Mar 2017 #34
I think the next is Thomas. yeoman6987 Mar 2017 #39
I can't get past the frozen trucker ruling. redwitch Mar 2017 #35
er yeah--bit of a stickler isn't he? heheh n/t librechik Mar 2017 #48
He shoots women's rights. milestogo Mar 2017 #37
If trump picked him.. mrsv Mar 2017 #42
Trump did not pick him Skittles Mar 2017 #51
BS BS BS BS--this is a man who said that women "manipulate maternity leave" niyad Mar 2017 #43
thanks for the info. And of course he is. librechik Mar 2017 #49
No and Fuck No. He's just another misogynistic tool of the KGOP. nt JTFrog Mar 2017 #45
and more:Neil Gorsuch: Corporations Have Rights. Women? Not So Much. niyad Mar 2017 #46
thank you for this post DonCoquixote Mar 2017 #59
this deserves its own OP. niyad Mar 2017 #64
Absolutely not. Gorsuch will strengthen inequality sharedvalues Mar 2017 #52
A trip down memory lane...try that there "waterboarding" - see how affective it is.. asiliveandbreathe Mar 2017 #53
oh, yikes. Thx for the links everybody! n/t! librechik Mar 2017 #54
He's been the opposite. Panich52 Mar 2017 #60
Fuck him. denbot Mar 2017 #62
his only goal is to dodge all questions lame54 Mar 2017 #65
GORSUCH IS PRO VOTER SUPPRESSION !!! WTF Kind of OP is this?!!?!?! uponit7771 Mar 2017 #66
changed my mind n/t librechik Mar 2017 #69
Dafuq? Act_of_Reparation Mar 2017 #68
changed my mind n/t librechik Mar 2017 #70
No way! He is to the right od Scalia! fun n serious Mar 2017 #71
yes, I truly get that now n/t librechik Mar 2017 #72
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»as a CO native I have to ...»Reply #59