With the Passing of Supreme Court Justice Ginsberg, Expect Political Fireworks to be Extreme and Possibly Career Ending | Beaufort County Now | Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg was a lion for the Leftist cause for decades after her nomination by President Clinton. | Supreme Court Justice Ginsberg, President Donald Trump, Constitutional imperative, Speaker Stammer'n' Nancy Pelosi, Justice Sandra Day O'Conner

Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)

With the Passing of Supreme Court Justice Ginsberg, Expect Political Fireworks to be Extreme and Possibly Career Ending

    Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg was a lion for the Leftist cause for decades after her nomination by President Clinton. Justice Ginsberg believed in a 'living Constitution', one that could be a malleable instrument to further the cause for a more liberal, Leftist Union, except for her stand on the First Amendment, which, unlike most of today's Liberals and Leftists who do not support that guaranteed freedom, Justice Ginsberg stood strong against her Democratic Socialist party, and for the right of all Americans to speak their minds, their hearts, their thoughts forever undeterred.

    I always admired the Justice for taking this unpopular stand, which broke with the majority of those from her own political party. That took gumption since Democratic Socialists are the party of propagandists, and intolerance for others that feel and think differently than they do.

    As sorry as I am for Justice Ginsberg's passing, I am certain President Trump will appoint a 3rd Justice to the Supreme Court in the next few weeks, or sooner, and that Justice will be approved by the Republican Senate, or those Republican Senators will lose their seats, and that would be okay too. RINOs must be exposed, and sent packing.

    As this Constitutional imperative continues, pay close attention to which politicians are real, and which are fake.

    Since the passing of Justice Ginsberg, the President is moving decisively to replace her with a qualified woman, who will honor the Constitution and the Rule of Law. Senate Majority Leader McConnell is moving quickly to put the Senate affirmation process in motion, and I would be shocked if whomever the President selects is not affirmed.

United States Supreme Court
United States Supreme Court - photo by Stan Deatherage
    Nominal Republican Senators Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski, respectively from the lowly populated states of New Hampshire and Alaska, have announced that they would not vote to affirm Mr. Trump's nomination until after the election, but these may be hollow words.

    It does not take a political genius to know that if either of these Nominals elected to not support this nomination - the first Conservative Woman to serve on the high court since Justice Sandra Day O'Conner - their political careers would not only be over, but a massive black stain would be slapped against their legacy in which they would never overcome.

    So, get ready for the biggest fight in the modern history of American politics in this election season, with non patriot Speaker Stammer'n' Nancy Pelosi yet promising Impeachments all around, and for what ... presumed hypocrisy? For this President performing his duties as prescribed for him to honor his office of president?

    The real deal here is this: No patriotic Republican will not vote to affirm a Republican President's appointment if he should select a fully qualified candidate. So far, President Donald Trump has put forth two excellent selections, even to the chagrin of the non patriot Democratic Socialist senators, who valued the dictates of The Resistance over any patriotic considerations. This President is prepared to put forth yet another third fine candidate, as is his Constitutional duty to do so, and no real Republican or patriot will vote against this nomination.

Should President Trump perform his Constitutional duty and appoint a third Supreme Court Justice, or wait until it is suitable to the Democratic Socialists in congress and the media?
  Yes, Mr. Trump has the Constitutional duty to appoint a supreme court justice and the U.S. Senate is constitutionally sworn to "advise and consent".
  No, it is too close to the election of president, and the while Democratic Socialists do not have control of the U.S. Senate, they do have the control of the U.S. House and the media.
  I don't pay attention to these sorts of things.
100 total vote(s)     What's your Opinion?


Latest Op-Ed & Politics

The fall 2020 semester did not go as planned for most students and many felt that their universities failed them.
Ross Marchand writes for the Martin Center about the new presidentís approach to higher education policy.
This piece was created by Paul Harvey many years ago, but reflect on its application to todayu
A former Carolina Panthers star has now become an advocate for re-opening North Carolina schools for in-person instruction.


Chicago prosecutors say 36-year-old Aditya Singh lived in the cityís OíHare International Airport for three months to avoid flying home to Los Angeles, California, amid the coronavirus pandemic.
So much is made of the Cancel Culture, which is as real as Trump Derangement Syndrome; however, the Impeachment Culture, as an offshoot of this Cancel Culture, has NOW won the day for the religiously Woke.
Looking into January, state legislative sessions will begin across the nation. For many states, a critical focus point will be on the emergency powers those statesí governments have exercised in the wake of COVID-19.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) will deliver an article of impeachment against former President Donald Trump to the Senate on Monday, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer announced Friday.
He thinks it's clearly unconstitutional to try a man already out of office.


Victor Davis Hanson writes for National Review Online about the work of President Trumpís commission on American history.


Back to Top