General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: as a CO native I have to say, Gorsuch seems to be a straight shooter. [View all]DonCoquixote
(13,647 posts)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 LiberalsNLawsuits 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.