The Democratic Party vs. Neil Gorsuch

By CARL M. CANNON / Staff columnist

One of the least uplifting aspects of modern American politics is how the out-of-power party essentially roots for the country to flounder.

Sometimes, this subversion is expected, such as when a presidential nominee trying to unseat a White House incumbent describes conditions in the country as much worse than they are, while hoping in quiet desperation for bad economic news. It’s a bipartisan impulse: to one degree or another Walter Mondale, Bob Dole, John Kerry, Mitt Romney — two Democrats, two Republicans — were guilty of indulging in it.

Less subtle is when partisans simply blurt it out: They want the newly installed president to fail. Rush Limbaugh expressed this sentiment about President Obama in 2009. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell said early in Barack Obama’s tenure that he aimed to help make him a one-term president.

Regarding Donald J. Trump, the Democratic Party’s leadership and much of the liberal punditariat have made it clear they want him to be a “no-term” president. They won’t confer on Trump the legitimacy of his Electoral College win. The cost of such hyper-partisanship is on full display with the Democrats’ disjointed opposition to Trump’s Supreme Court nominee.

Who knew Trump could tap someone as impressive as Neil Gorsuch? Yes, Judge Gorsuch’s name was on a roster of Trump-approved Supreme Court picks he released last year, but most liberals didn’t think Trump could win. But he did win, and here we are, with Senate Democrats essentially saying that the “advice and consent” language in the Constitution allows them to deny Trump the ability to fill a Supreme Court vacancy.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren, the fiery Massachusetts populist, has described Gorsuch to liberal groups as “corporate America’s flunky.” Emulating Donald Trump’s preferred method of communication, Warren cites a novel reason for opposing Gorsuch’s…

Read the full article from the Source…

Back to Top