Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Archive for February, 2022

MARGOT CLEVELAND Op-ed: Why the Right Should Root for Biden to Pick the Most Insane Supreme Court Nominee


COMMENTARY BY: MARGOT CLEVELAND | FEBRUARY 01, 2022

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2022/02/01/why-the-right-should-root-for-biden-to-pick-the-most-insane-supreme-court-nominee/

Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer

With Thursday’s official announcement by Justice Stephen Breyer of his impending retirement, conservatives are strategizing on the best approach to prevent confirmation of a leftist activist justice. Instead, Republicans should be praying that President Biden nominates the looniest, most far-left lawyer possible for a slot on the high court. Why? Because history has proven that a far-left justice will be no worse than a moderately liberal justice in the casting of Supreme Court votes, meaning there is no downside to a far-left pick, while the upside potential is huge, given that it is Biden appointing the new justice and not a Republican president: Thank you very much, Never Trumpers.

While over the last four decades justices appointed by Republican presidents have demonstrated a penchant to “grow” in office or have proven more moderate or pragmatic than proclaimed during confirmation, the same is not true for Democrat-appointed justices, who vote in near-perfect lockstep over their careers.

Then there are the Republican-appointed justices who do not abandon their judicial philosophy, but conclude that a faithful application of originalism requires them to vote with the leftist wing of the court. Justice Neil Gorsuch provides a perfect example of this phenomenon, providing the fifth vote in several cases in the criminal context, and before him the now-late Justice Anton Scalia.

Conversely, in close or contentious cases, Democrat-appointed justices represent a block geared toward progressive policy outcomes.” It matters whether these justices are perceived as center-left or hard-left: The desired liberal outcome dictates the decision. So, fighting for a less leftist justice serves no purpose. On the other hand, there are many positives to the conservative cause if Biden nominates a far-left candidate to the Supreme Court. With midterm elections later this year, Biden naming an extremist to the high court positions Republicans perfectly to talk about the importance of elections—and specifically control of the Senate. The nomination of a far-left candidate will also provide an opportunity during the confirmation process for Republicans to highlight the recent public revelations of the Democratic Party’s true far-left goals. President Biden has already showcased the party’s obsession with identity politics by promising the country his nominee would be a black woman, so men and whites need not apply.

Further, if Republicans maintain decorum and respect during the process, and focus on the nominee’s judicial philosophy and policy, they can score points with a public disgusted by the left’s disgraceful treatment of Justice Brett Kavanaugh and his family. And the more leftist Biden’s candidate, the more restrained Republicans will appear by comparison. Moreover, the further left the candidate, the more justified a “no” vote will be for swing-state Republicans, allowing them to vote against the nomination based on principle, and thereby avoid the obstructionist label. Likewise, moderate Republicans or Republican senators in purple or blue states could justify a “yes” vote based on their view that a president is entitled to his nomination.

The more extreme Biden’s candidate, the more this position will inure to Republicans’ benefit when a supposedly far-right candidate finds himself or herself nominated to the Supreme Court by a future Republican president. The same moderate Republicans can point to their vote for Biden’s extremist justice as proof of the consistency of their position that a president is entitled to his nominee, or if they are kicked out of office over their vote for Biden’s nominee, a stronger senator could be in that office. And should Democrat senators en mass vote against a future Republican nominee, the hypocrisy charge will strike more squarely the more extreme Biden’s leftist nominee is.

It is also not just the fight that will benefit the conservative cause: Elevation of a far-left justice to the Supreme Court will advance originalism more than if Biden were to replace Breyer with a milquetoast moderate. That premise may seem counterintuitive because we think of “moderates” in the context of politics and not precedent.

For a Supreme Court decision to be “precedential,” five justices must agree with both the outcome and the analysis. Were Biden to appoint a so-called “moderate,” her vote would tally with the far-left wing of the high court and her reasoning would likely be mainstream enough to, at times, shift Justice John Roberts or Justice Brett Kavanaugh to join with the other two leftist justices to create a majority opinion that binds lower courts.

Conversely, a far-left justice will also vote with Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan but may drag her sister justices too far to the left to entice any so-called moderate justices to join in the decision. Then, either the leftist side will lose, or the outcome will favor the leftist position, but the Supreme Court’s decision will be fractured, with several of the justices writing separately, resulting in no binding precedent and only dicta.

Of course, originalism would benefit more from the appointment of an originalist justice, but that is not an option now, as President Biden is our president and Breyer submitted his resignation effective upon confirmation of his successor. So the choice is between Justice Breyer and another liberal justice or a far-left one. Stalling in the hope of obtaining a more palatable liberal will leave us with Justice Breyer and the need to delay an appointment for three years.

Conservatism would be better served by using Biden’s appointment to remind the public that elections have consequences. The loonier left his nominee is, the better that point can be made.


Whoopi Goldberg tells Stephen Colbert the ‘Nazis lied’ and ‘had issues with ethnicity, not with race’ regarding Jews amid Holocaust


Reported by DAVE URBANSKI | February 01, 2022

Read more at https://www.theblaze.com/news/whoopi-goldberg-stephen-colbert-the-nazis-lied-had-issues-with-ethnicity-not-race/

Whoopi Goldberg — on the heels of her controversial comments on “The View” Monday that the Holocaust wasn’t “about race” and instead was about “man’s inhumanity to man” — appeared on “The Late Show with Stephen Colbert” Monday to offer further explanations about the firestorm she started. It’s important to note that while Goldberg apologized on social media for her comments just after 8 p.m. Monday — saying the Holocaust was about race after all, as well as man’s inhumanity to man — her interview with Colbert presumably took place earlier, as “The Late Show” is taped Mondays from 5:30 to 7 p.m. and then airs at 11:35 p.m.

Colbert right away brought up Goldberg’s comments from earlier in the day, and she was more than willing to explain herself.

“It upset a lot of people, which was never, ever, ever, ever my intention,” Goldberg said, adding that “I feel, being black, when we talk about race, it’s a very different thing to me. So, I said that I felt that the Holocaust wasn’t about race. And people got very, very, very angry and still are angry. I mean, I’m getting … mail from folks and very real anger. ‘Cause people feel very differently. But I thought it was a salient discussion because as a black person I think of race as being something that I can see. So, I see you, and I know what race you are.”

After rehashing that she felt the Holocaust instead was about man’s inhumanity to man, Goldberg recounted that Jewish people disagreed with her.

“They said, ‘No, no, we are a race.’ And I understand. I understand. I felt differently. I respect everything everyone is saying to me. … I don’t wanna fake apologize. … I was … very upset that people … misunderstood what I was saying,” she continued. “And so, because of it, they’re saying that I’m anti-Semitic, and that I’m denying the Holocaust, and all these other things which would … never occur to me … I thought we were having a discussion about race, which everyone I think is having.”

Colbert — calling himself the “white guy in the conversation” and a non-Jew — added, “It seems to me that whiteness is a construct created by colonial powers during the beginning of the colonial imperialist era in order to exploit other people, and that they could apply it to all different kinds of people. That idea of race. And the American experience tends to be based on skin.”

Goldberg agreed: “Yes, and so that is what race means to me.”

“When you talk about being a racist, I was saying you can’t call [the Holocaust] racism. This was evil. This wasn’t based on the skin. You couldn’t tell who was Jewish. [The Nazis] had to delve deeply to figure it out.”

Colbert appeared to agree, adding that when the Nazis figured out who was Jewish, they made Jews wear yellow stars on their clothing to visually distinguish them from non-Jews.

“My point is, [the Nazis] had to do the work,” Goldberg said before adding an anecdote: “If the Klan is coming down the street, and I’m standing with a Jewish friend … I’m gonna run, but if my friend decides not to run, they’ll get passed by most times because you can’t tell who’s Jewish. … And so that’s what I was trying to explain. And I understand that not everybody sees it that way, and … I did a lot of harm, I guess, to myself, and people … decided I was all these all these other things — I’m actually not. And I’m incredibly torn up by being told these things about myself. And you know, I get it. Folks are angry. I accept that. And I did it to myself. This was my thought process, and I will work hard not to think that way again.”

When Colbert asked Goldberg if she now understood that the Nazis indeed saw the Holocaust as a racial issue, she replied that “the Nazis lied … they had issues with ethnicity, not with race, because most of the Nazis were white people, and most of the people they were attacking were white people. So, to me, I’m thinking, ‘How can you say it’s about race if you are fighting each other?'”

Goldberg added that one of her concerns is explaining it all to children in a way that makes sense: “I said this wasn’t racial. This was about white on white. And everybody said, ‘No, no, no, it was racial,’ and so that’s what this all came from. So once again: Don’t write me anymore, I know how you feel, OK? I already know. I get it. And I’m going to take your word for it and never bring it up again.”

How Whoopi Became Today’s Hot Topic On “The View” youtu.be

Manchin: Build Back Better Is ‘Dead’


Reported by ANDREW TRUNSKY | POLITICAL REPORTER | February 01, 2022

Read more at https://dailycaller.com/2022/02/01/joe-manchin-build-back-better-dead/

Senators Meet For Weekly Policy Luncheons
(Drew Angerer/Getty Images)

Democratic West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin told reporters Tuesday that President Joe Biden’s Build Back Better bill was “dead” when asked about the status of renewed negotiations. Manchin preceded his remark by saying that “there is no Build Back Better bill,” adding, “I don’t know what you’re talking about.”

The centrist Democrat came out against the bill in December 2021, criticizing its size and scope amid decades-high inflation. His lack of support effectively killed any chance the bill had of passing the evenly-divided Senate, given Republicans’ unanimous opposition to it. Though Manchin did not support the House-passed bill and was unable to reach a compromise with his Democratic colleagues, he has not shut the door to potentially restarting negotiations in the future. He has also signaled support for several individual policies in the bill, including but not limited to climate change mitigation measures and universal pre-K. 

One policy that Democrats are insisting be prioritized in any reworked package is the expanded child tax credit, which the party adopted in March 2021 which expired at the end of the year. Several Democrats wrote to Biden directly, urging him to push for its adoption, while some Republicans have even offered their own alternatives if the credit remains scuttled.

Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon by A.F. Branco


A.F. Branco Cartoon – Here’s His Sign

A.F. BRANCO on February 1, 2022 | https://comicallyincorrect.com/a-f-branco-cartoon-heres-his-sign/

Iran cries “death to America” but it looks like Biden is beating them to it with his disastrous policies.

Iran for Brandon
Political cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2022.

Donations/Tips accepted and appreciated – $1.00 – $5.00 – $25.00 – $50.00 – $100 – it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. Also Venmo @AFBranco – THANK YOU!

A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been popular all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, and shared by President Donald Trump.

Tag Cloud