Character Matters? Not to This GOP

Posted by

Back during the Clinton years, all you heard from the Republican Party was how important character was for a president of the United States. Now, of course, you’ll never hear that word in any shape or form from the current Republican occupants in Congress. Gee, I wonder why?

It’s a trend that’s been going on for a while now. Embracing the current president as they’ve done for nearly four years shows that the party could give a rat’s you know what about character. They parked themselves squarely in Donald Trump’s orbit, rarely a whisper or a peep of discontent, other than the occasional “privately, many Senators are appalled at the president’s statements.” Privately?

Cowards – every damn one of them.

And while we’re speaking about character, how about we address a certain newly confirmed Supreme Court Justice by the name of Amy Comey Barrett? Can we please talk about her character? Or, should we get approval from Republicans to see if it’s ok?

I’m sorry to break it to Republicans; Ms. Barrett will forever be tarnished as damaged goods by the American people – at least those who believe in fairness and playing by the rules. The whole process of her confirmation is tainted beyond repair, and they must play an enormous political price for how they rammed through this nomination.

With only three years as a Court of Appeals Judge and no history of even trying a case in a court of law, saying Barrett’s not qualified for such a prestigious position is not a bogus proposition. We know there are more qualified judges and lawyers out there. But the Republicans chose this particular person? The political and ideological opposite of the legendary Ruth Bader Ginsburg?

They have no shame.

But today, my rant is not centered upon her far-right, out of the mainstream ideology. No, today it’s all about Judge Barrett, the person. Because, in my view, what transpired Monday evening at the White House tells us all we need to know of who Barrett is.

Participating as she did in a White House political rally/swearing-in ceremony is beyond the pale, especially with the election only a week away from coming to fruition. She may as well have put on a red MAGA hat. Nothing like pledging one’s independence to rule on cases while simultaneously accepting the nomination from the most partisan unqualified president in modern history.

And therein lies the rub. Accepting the nomination in the first place, under such a cloud of deceit and hypocrisy, tells us all we need to know about Ms. Barrett. She wanted the job, pure and simple – no matter the circumstances surrounding it.

A person with integrity and honor would have said to the current president: “Sir, I cannot accept this nomination, for how it was handled will hover over my tenure until the day I decide to hang up my robe. If you were to win a second term as president, I would be most honored to accept your offer. But with the election only weeks away, I cannot in good conscience accept your offer at this time, because quite frankly, it sends the wrong signal to the American people.”

But obviously, Ms. Barrett lacks the integrity and honor we should expect in a Supreme Court Justice. In many ways, she mirrors the Republican Party as a whole. It’s always about the power grab. It’s always about what’s in it for me and the hell with everyone else.

More than likely, though, Ms. Barrett thinks she’s the best person for the job. She wants to take us back to a time where most of the current president’s base of support lives daily, at least in their minds, that is. You know, that more white, less diverse time when women played a much more subservient role in society and men ruled the world.

The fact is, the current president made her an offer she could not refuse, I suppose. Again, doing what’s right doesn’t matter anymore. It’s about, among other things, putting minorities in their place, maintaining the white power structure, ending gay, lesbian, and reproductive rights, and giving corporations the ability to pretty much do as they please. In other words, she will become the newest standard-bearer of the Republican Party’s platform.

She could have said no to the current president. But why should we expect anything different from these people? Now, having nominated and confirmed three Supreme Court Justices in his first term, the court’s legacy has Donald Trump’s small little fingerprints all over it for several years to come.

It’s a travesty the likes I hope we never see again in my lifetime. Ok, maybe Ms. Barrett will occasionally surprise us. Perhaps she’ll be fair on some things, show a bit of independence, and do the right thing. John Roberts, on occasion, has done so. Why not her, too?

It’s a glimmer, folks. At this point, all we can do is hope like hell for an overwhelming Joe Biden victory on November 3. Then we can push him to, in fact, pack the court, for that is the only prudent thing to do in response to this naked power grab.

In the meantime, let’s hope Ms. Barrett isn’t the total disaster we all think she’s going to be. But make no mistake about it, she’s tainted forever. She could have done the honorable thing and turned the offer down. She chose not to.

On that note, I’ll leave you with what the Republican Party of yesteryear used to say:

Character matters.

It doesn’t matter to Amy Coney Barrett and this Republican Party. Character? Who cares? Just win, baby, and own the libs.

Pathetic.

18 comments

  1. I fully concur. Ms. Barrett has in mind the goal of infusing her brand of religion into the governance of this nation. Only 65% of the people in this nation identify as Christian, yet the rest of us seem not to matter. Ms. Barrett, obviously, has no sense of what is right for the entire nation, only for those in her own inner circle. Likewise Mitch McConnell and the rest of the dirty republicans in the Senate. We all, even Trump’s base, already know he has no conscience, no core values other than pleasing himself. I had reservations about adding more Justices, but no longer … I think it will be essential that the Biden/Harris team add a minimum of four Justices early next year … moderates like Merrick Garland who will do their best to be fair to ALL the people in this nation, not just the delusional. Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr. Good post — as Nan commented, you put into words what all of us have been thinking.

    Liked by 3 people

    1. Thank you Jill! And for the reblog, of course. Yes, I’m all for expanding the court. Here’s what I say to Republicans screaming bloody murder about whether Biden might do it: STFU and too freaking bad!!
      I like how Biden says he’ll do a commission for about 180 days to study the issue. That way, he can say he brought in people from different sides of the aisle to see what can be done. And, we can also see how Ms Barrett and her far-right extremist pals on the court will be ruling on things like Obamacare..choice…etc…In other words, how out of touch and radical are they going to be? I think you and I know what they will be like, but as I said in my post, maybe she’ll surprise us. Highly doubtful!!!

      Like

      1. I second that motion: STFU and too freaking bad!! I like Biden’s idea of a commission of legal experts to assess and advise, but I think 180 days is too long. I would like to see that time frame cut in half. Yes, I’ve seen a number of references to “The Handmaid’s Tale” since her confirmation, and it seems a fair analogy. She would set women’s rights, LGBT rights, and civil rights … human rights … back 50 or 100 years, given her choice. Sigh. No, I don’t look for her to surprise us … if she does, I’ll gladly eat my words.

        Liked by 1 person

  2. Reblogged this on Filosofa's Word and commented:
    The majority of people in this country, including republicans, felt the confirmation and swearing in of Amy Barrett was improper and inappropriate, that a nomination should have waited until after January 20th when we have a new (please, please, please …) president. The entire confirmation process was rushed through, and Barrett is not at all qualified for the position, never even having tried a case! She can never fill the shoes of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg … perhaps nobody can, but Barrett damn sure cannot. Our friend Jeff has put into words what I think the majority of us are feeling. Thank you, Jeff!

    Liked by 2 people

  3. It’s disgusting that an incoming Supreme Court judge should appear in a political video which shows her not to be impartial and bipartisan. Makes a travesty of her questions before Congress and her promise as a judge.
    Hugs.

    Liked by 3 people

  4. Jeff, character matters. We treasured the words when
    Michael Douglas’ president said them in “The American President.” I quote conservative pundit David Brooks who describes the US president as “lacking empathy or a sense of decency” be it continually misinforming about COVID-19 or firing acting FBI director Andy McCabe on his last day of work before he retired to deny McCabe a pension.

    If there is anything to remember before this election, think of that McCabe story. Who does that? Keith

    Liked by 1 person

    1. You’re right Keith…Who? Only him. No other president would be that callous, that shallow, or that evil. It’s why he must be soundly and overwhelmingly defeated on Tuesday. Nothing less.

      Like

  5. it would be nice if wordpress had a growl or pissed off button and not just like. You guys are all one issue voters, “republicans want to turn back the clock, they want to take away a woman’s right to choose.” bullshit! cavinaugh didn’t do it and there’s no logical reason to think that Amy would either. This is just more partisan crap. it’s just stupid stupid stupid. Biden is going to lose! just wait and see.

    Like

    1. I also wish there was a button for ‘clueless.’ Where have you been when they’ve ruled over and over for no limits on $$$ in campaigns, corporations over workers rights, voter suppression over voter rights (Holder v Shelby, in case you have never heard of it), which gutted the Voting Rights Act?
      Really Scott? Please read something other than right-wing BS. I’ve given you suggestions before: USA Today…Reuters…Bloomberg etc..
      I hope you’re right on Ms Barrett. In my post, I expressed that as my desire. The jury, as they say, is out on that one. Time will tell.

      Liked by 1 person

    2. Scott, I have been called many things, but never a one issue voter. The fact that Trump can win is not the point. The point is he should not win given his corrupt, bullying and untruthful bent, greatly damaging our global reputation, mishandling the COVID crisis, continued attacks on our health care, demeaning the voting process, making it easier tp pollute our environment, increasing the debt and creating more civil unrest. Yes, he can win, but I hope for our country and planet’s sake he is voted out. That is my two cents, which won’t even buy a cup of coffee. Keith

      Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s