And begin they have, quite before President Trump (how I enjoy writing those two words together) even announced his selection.
From the WashingtonTimes.com:
Democrats vow to vote ‘No’ on Supreme Court nominee regardless of whom Trump picks
by Alex Swoyer
Some Democrats said they don’t have to wait for President Trump to pick a Supreme Court nominee — they’re voting “No” regardless of who he names.
Sen. Bob Casey became the latest one, saying Monday that the entire process the president has followed was “corrupt” because he was working from a list he wrote with the help of the conservative Heritage Foundation and Federalist Society.
“Any judge on this list is fruit of a corrupt process straight from the D.C. swamp,” he said.
Other Democrats, still salty over the GOP’s treatment of one of President Obama’s nominees in 2016, said they won’t accept any nominee until after the November election.
Leftist obstructionists, just as Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell says here:
Justice Kennedy’s resignation letter had barely arrived in the President’s hands before several of our Democratic colleagues began declaring their blanket opposition to anyone at all that the President might name. #SCOTUSnominee pic.twitter.com/uQ2QZMOsDD
— Leader McConnell (@SenateMajLdr) July 9, 2018
Then on Monday, as promised, President Trump announced his SCOTUS selection. From the NYTimes.com:
Brett Kavanaugh Is Trump’s Pick for Supreme Court
by Mark Landler & Maggie Haberman
President Trump on Monday nominated Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh, a politically connected member of Washington’s conservative legal establishment, to fill Justice Anthony M. Kennedy’s seat on the Supreme Court, setting up an epic confirmation battle and potentially cementing the court’s rightward tilt for a generation.
The nomination of Judge Kavanaugh, 53, a federal appeals court judge, former aide to President George W. Bush and onetime investigator of President Bill Clinton, was not a huge surprise, given his conservative record, elite credentials and deep ties among the Republican legal groups that have advanced conservatives for the federal bench.
That was the New York Times. You can see the slant bleeding through. And of course what I term the “Kavalanche” of objection commenced like a goose greasing the sluices after having had crab cakes and broccoli.
We could have gotten another Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who doesn’t believe in the US Constitution at all — wouldn’t recommend it to anyone.
In reaction prior to the announcement, not once does Socialist Bernie Sanders mention the importance of the US Constitution or the Bill of Rights below. He does not delineate positive vs negative rights or the reason for the Constitution itself which is, of course, why the US Supreme Court exists. Separation of powers. The Founding Fathers. The fundamental reason for the creation of this nation in the first place.
There is this as well, from Fox News:
A brief bit of reality from CNN:
Let’s be honest: the fundamental problem with Brett Kavanaugh is this, from Breitbart.com:
Kavanaugh: Judges Must Interpret, Not Make Law, Interpret Statues and Constitution as Written
by Ian Hanchett
After the announcement of his nomination to the Supreme Court, Judge Brett Kavanaugh stated, “A judge must be independent and must interpret the law, not make the law. A judge must interpret statutes as written, and a judge must interpret the Constitution as written, informed by history and tradition and precedent.”
Kavanaugh said, “The framers established that the Constitution is designed to secure the blessings of liberty. Justice Kennedy devoted his career to securing liberty. I am deeply honored to be nominated to fill his seat on the Supreme Court.”
He later added, “My judicial philosophy is straightforward. A judge must be independent and must interpret the law, not make the law. A judge must interpret statutes as written, and a judge must interpret the Constitution as written, informed by history and tradition and precedent. For the past 11 years, I’ve taught hundreds of students, primarily at Harvard Law School. I teach that the Constitution’s separation of powers protects individual liberty, and I remain grateful to the dean who hired me, Justice Elena Kagan. As a judge, I hire four law clerks each year. I look for the best. My law clerks come from diverse backgrounds and points of view. I am proud that a majority of my law clerks have been women.”
Kavanaugh concluded, “I will tell each senator that I revere the Constitution. I believe that an independent judiciary is the crown jewel of our constitutional republic. If confirmed by the Senate, I will keep an open mind in every case, and I will always strive to preserve the Constitution of the United States and the American rule of law.”
Judge Brett Kavanaugh stated:
Another wrinkle, from the WashingtonTimes.com:
Susan Collins, Joe Manchin, other swing votes open to Trump’s Supreme Court pick
by Stephen Dinan
The senators who will most likely decide Judge Brett Kavanaugh’s fate were studiously noncommittal Monday, promising a thorough and fair vetting before they say whether they’ll support his nomination to the Supreme Court.
Only a few Republicans and a handful of Democrats are likely in play in the closely divided Senate.
And depending on absences, a single Republican defection could sink the pick — while the support of one or two Democrats could guarantee Judge Kavanaugh will be on the high court by the time the next term begins in October.
Sen. Susan Collins, the Republican that Democrats are most likely to sway, said Judge Kavanaugh brough “impressive credentials and extensive experience.”
But she wouldn’t go further.
How many Demorats will line up behind Brett Kavanaugh simply because he’s, truly, offensive as fresh milk or blue sky?
You see, a bit of the bottom line must be this: Judge Brett Kavanaugh was confirmed by the US Senate back in 2006 by a positive margin of 21 Senators, with a tally of 57 to 36. He has repeatedly been upheld by SCOTUS, having heard over 300 cases.
What has changed since then?
Only one thing: President Donald John Trump.
BZ
Within minutes of President Trump making public his choice for nomination there were already the useful idiots protesting in several venues with their shop printed ‘home made’ signs saying ‘NO Kavanaugh’. I wonder if they had car trunks full of similar signs bearing the names of the other potential nominees. Probably.
(side note: Since it was leaked that Barrett was going to be the nominee and it was believed as credible, the protesters had no advance notice that Kavanaugh was the actual pick. So they must’ve had signs made featuring the name of each potential nominee.)
Yes, the commies had issued a blanket rejection even before Kennedy’s resignation but with Kavanaugh the opposition will be greater for as you say it is because he will confine himself to interpretation of the law rather than being open to judicial activism. But Kavanaugh has already been voted on and accepted at the District level.
The clincher for his confirmation is twofold; any politician who votes against him puts their own reelection in November at risk, and if Kavanaugh is not confirmed the nomination will most likely pass to Barrett.
Even with Kavanaugh confirmed, Barrett will still be in the line up ready to replace the old bag RBG when she croaks. She’s mostly there already.
Good post you put together.
The (P)regressives continue to let their mouths overload their asses. The Lightbringer was their high water mark. Rep. Tip O’Neill said, “All politics are local”. Now the (P)regressives will concentrate on this nominee and be distracted from local politics. Good thing, IMO. Ms. Ocasio-Cortez’s primary victory in the Bronx probably won’t be duplicated if the usual suspects are frothing at the mouth over a Supreme Court nominee.
I was surprised at his choice and have my doubts. I heard Kavanaugh’s acceptance speech and it gave me chills, and not in a good way. His accolades toward Kennedy, made doubt this man was the right choice.
Y’all have to understand the speech was highly scripted. Everything from that point forward until the confirmation will likewise be scripted. It’s politics. But if you want a good look at the man there are over 300 legal opinions he has written. And look who is supporting him; Franklin Graham, Heritage Foundation, ACLJ, Judicial Watch, NRA, SAF, and I think GOA I am not sure, among others.