Little Notes to the Editor

4/10/17 Steve Cohen on marijuana: "In 100 years people will wonder why we were so petty about marijuana" Or in 100 years, people will look back on pot and compare it to cocaine. Why were they so dumb to not regulate it?

Judge Gorsuch. Rep stole nomination... Well, no other President nominated a candidate in his final year. The Obama effrontery was evident again in "demanding" to have his way, even on the way out. The tidal wave of EO are evidence.

Sarah Martin McConnell, Nashville
"At that time, Republican Senate leaders defiantly refused to hold a vote on any potential nomination during Obama's last year in office. Through this undemocratic and unprecedented block of a president's historical right to nominate, Senate Republicans flat-out cheated."

To paraphrase Elizabeth Barrett Browning , "How do I disagree with you? Let me count the ways." I guess we might agree on it being undemocratic. It was definitely republican...in this incarnation. However the next comment blows this all to smithereens. "Unprecedented" implies that such a thing has never happened before. Every newscast of the Gorsuch hearings and now confirmation refer back to the Obama judicial candidates being confirmed by the Nuclear Option. (NO)

Unprecedented might also apply to former President Obama nominating a SCOTUS justice in the final year of his term. Many outlets also reported that tidbit. So the refusal to consider an "out of the ordinary" nomination is not "stealing" the seat.

And were we to consider the ideology of the candidate and his predecessor, putting Judge Merrick into the seat would definitely be a coup comparable to stealing a seat for the liberals. (We are not supposed to consider the inclinations of judges, but it is hard not to notice the definite "bent" of the Obama candidates. But I degress.)

So if "flat-out cheating" means getting a candidate approved, I guess Ms. McConnell is right. But she neglected to mention that this is also not unprecedented. Oh yes, the Senate did not block former President Obama's right to nominate. He could have done so multiple times. The Senate deferred to the larger "precedent" of allowing a new President to nominate. (And speaking of precedent, how is Sen. Feinstein doing with the final year nomination. Her interrogation of Judge Gorsuch seemed to consist of a preponderance of concern for "precedents." She even suggested a "super precedent." Neither is in the Constitution, but who cares?)

Jim League
906 Avery Valley DR
Smyrna 37167
jim.league@gmail.com Please publish my email with any letter. Thank you for the consideration.
Day phone 615-810-8389 night phone 615-426-3532