Patterico's Pontifications

1/31/2017

Obama Administration Lawyer: “Why Liberals Should Back Neil Gorsuch” (Plus Bonus Elizabeth Warren Nonsense)

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 8:30 pm

There’s at least one honest man among the left in this world, and he supports Neil Gorsuch for the Supreme Court:

I was an acting solicitor general for President Barack Obama; Judge Gorsuch has strong conservative bona fides and was appointed to the 10th Circuit by President George W. Bush. But I have seen him up close and in action, both in court and on the Federal Appellate Rules Committee (where both of us serve); he brings a sense of fairness and decency to the job, and a temperament that suits the nation’s highest court.

Considerable doubts about the direction of the Supreme Court have emerged among Democrats in recent weeks, particularly given some of the names that have been floated by the administration for possible nomination. With environmental protection, reproductive rights, privacy, executive power and the rights of criminal defendants (including the death penalty) on the court’s docket, the stakes are tremendous. I, for one, wish it were a Democrat choosing the next justice. But since that is not to be, one basic criterion should be paramount: Is the nominee someone who will stand up for the rule of law and say no to a president or Congress that strays beyond the Constitution and laws?

I have no doubt that if confirmed, Judge Gorsuch would help to restore confidence in the rule of law. His years on the bench reveal a commitment to judicial independence — a record that should give the American people confidence that he will not compromise principle to favor the president who appointed him.

There are also dishonest people among the left — a lot of them. For a hint of the type of claptrap we’ll see in coming days, check out Elizabeth “Pocahontas” Warren:

Before even joining the bench, he advocated to make it easier for public companies to defraud investors. As a judge, he has twisted himself into a pretzel to make sure the rules favor giant companies over workers and individual Americans. He has sided with employers who deny wages, improperly fire workers, or retaliate against whistleblowers for misconduct. He has ruled against workers in all manner of discrimination cases. And he has demonstrated hostility toward women’s access to basic health care.

Blah, blah, blah. It goes on like that. These Native Americans do drone on, don’t they?

Guess what? She is going to lose. So don’t be angry at her. Laugh at her. Point, and laugh.

[Cross-posted at RedState and The Jury Talks Back.]

56 Responses to “Obama Administration Lawyer: “Why Liberals Should Back Neil Gorsuch” (Plus Bonus Elizabeth Warren Nonsense)”

  1. Ding.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  2. She did not say “Turn back the clock” so she cannot claim the prize. (Probably worried about plagiarism.)

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  3. She practiced her shpiel on Oprah and John Stewart, there was no need for subtlety there.

    narciso (54b108)

  4. Did he promise Trump that he would sign all his bills?

    Dave (711345)

  5. justices don’t sign bills.

    elissa (904156)

  6. R.I.P. Bobby Freeman, singer of the immortal “Do You Wanna Dance”

    Icy (aa8429)

  7. Well hopefully sometime since last March he’s found out differently :)

    elissa (904156)

  8. Pelosi:

    [A] very hostile appointment” and “a very bad decision, well outside the mainstream of American legal thought.”

    Dana (023079)

  9. These Native Americans do drone on, don’t they?

    Wait. Wut?

    Dana (023079)

  10. Well said, Senator Warren.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  11. What’s the word, Norma desmond,

    narciso (54b108)

  12. As inept and poorly informed as the Democrats are, “sign all his bills” indeed, they at least show a willingness to fight. The contrast between the mayhem the Democrats will cause as minorities in both the House and Senate in the coming months will be a stark contrast to the pathetic record the Republicans created as majorities over the past two years. It must have taken a lot of valium to be able to sit idly watching Obama give Iran nuclear weapons, let alone the out of control Federal budget.

    Trump is the right fellow for the job. He is willing to name the enemy, and he isn’t concerned about appearing to build a working relationship with those who proclaim their enmity. Which is just as well since they are busy digging holes, rabbit warrens no less. Let us hope that Gorsuch can withstand the assault that is sure to come. Trump has made “Fake News” an issue, and the clarity this gives to the present situation will be very useful to him as the battle rages.

    BobStewartatHome (d1b2b6)

  13. Trump’s sister signed bills when she was a judge, according to Trump. If Maryanne can do it, why can’t Gorsuch?

    nk (dbc370)

  14. The NYT editorial board really have short memories and a predictable take on this evening’s events:

    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/31/opinion/neil-gorsuch-the-nominee-for-a-stolen-seat.html

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  15. If we required our candidates to know something about our country, Obama would have failed with his 57 states comment. Trump was speaking of something his sister signed, do we know what it was? Perhaps his confusion wasn’t as damning as redstate would have us believe. Moreover, if this was really telling, why didn’t one of the other Republican hopefuls jump on it? We have primaries to weed out the weak ones, and this would seem to be an opportunity. But instead Trump managed to stampede the whole herd with baseless lies. If this is where we are, we should be thankful that Trump is both willing to take the abuse, and to dish it out. It may be Gresham’s Law, but Trump is still in arena dealing in the common currency.

    BobStewartatHome (d1b2b6)

  16. Wait. Wut?

    lol

    Patterico (115b1f)

  17. As a Governor, George W. Bush knew who signed bills.
    But that didn’t stop him from nominating Harriet Miers.

    Cruz Supporter (102c9a)

  18. I did not plagiarize Red State or Patterico. I heard Trump say it during the debates. He meant court opinion.

    nk (dbc370)

  19. But what difference at this point does it make? So far, with his appointments and his executive orders, Trump has proven that his Trumpkins’ trust in him was well-placed. I can only wish him well and hope he keeps it up.

    nk (dbc370)

  20. BobStewartatHome (d1b2b6) — 1/31/2017 @ 9:36 pm <blockquote. Trump was speaking of something his sister signed, do we know what it was? An “opinion” not a bill.

    Trump probably did not remember the word, or, just possibly, didn’t know there was a different word for what a federal appelate judge signed on a multi-member court.

    Sammy Finkelman (8a673f)

  21. “he has demonstrated hostility toward women’s access to basic health care.”
    Is this the basic health care provided by Planned Parenthood? Almost none do prenatal care and sonograms only for abortions. Unless she can show cases and opinions by the judge that confirms her contentions, what she says is pure conjecture.

    eeyore (02669d)

  22. Warren is a repetitive scold.
    Hopefully she will be the nominee in 2020

    steveg (5508fb)

  23. “Health care” is the new euphemism for abortion. Saw some Dem dude get eviscerated by Tucker Carlson tonight when referring to women’s “health care”.

    Patricia (5fc097)

  24. #22 eeyore, as everyone knows, Judge Gorsuch is opposed to women having routine check-ups and he has ruled that their access to aspirin and band-aids should be restricted. He also doesn’t believe a male doctor should be allowed to examine a female patient, which, admittedly can be problematic since he’s also opposed to women going to school in order to become a doctor.

    All in all, he’s very much in line with the mainstream thought in Yemen, Syria, Afghanistan, Sudan, et al.
    In other words, he’s quite similar to the very people the progressives are insisting would be a welcome addition to the American melting pot and the ongoing American Experiment of representative democracy, federalism, and pluralism!

    Oh, the irony of progressivism, huh?! (LOL)

    Cruz Supporter (102c9a)

  25. Patricia, that was a beautiful thing. Tucker kept asking the guy if an abortion was taking a life and the guy was too afraid to answer.

    Sad how they know they encourage evil, all for power.

    NJRob (43d957)

  26. Wait. Wut?

    Dana (023079) — 1/31/2017 @ 9:16 pm

    Considering Sen. Warren’s claim of Native American heritage, I should see if my 1/32 of Choctaw-Cherokee applies. I mean, if she can claim on the basis of he cheekbones, I should be able to claim on a proven lineage.

    Bill H (971e5f)

  27. The word is “comeback”, iirc.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  28. @ Bill H, #27:

    Given the citizenship rules for the various Choctaw and Cherokee tribes/bands — there are two of the former (one in Oklahoma and one in Mississippi), and three of the latter (two in Oklahoma and one in North Carolina), you will not be able to claim both Choctaw and Cherokee heritage. Neither the Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma nor the Mississippi Band of Choctaws allows for multiple tribal affiliations. So even if you could prove ancestry to all five groups, you would still have to choose one of the two peoples.

    Also, be aware that your blood quantum may be an issue. The Mississippi Band of Choctaws, the United Keetoowah Band of Cherokees, and the Eastern Band of Cherokees all have minimum blood quantums which you would fall below (I believe 1/2, 1/4, and 1/16 respectively). However, the Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma and the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma do not have minimum blood quantums — meaning that if you can prove any degree of tribal blood, you can be a member. So hopefully you would be a descendant of someone who belonged to one of those last two.

    Finally, I don’t know what you mean by “proven lineage,” but you would have to be able to provide copies of authentic government records connecting you, generation by generation, to someone listed on the official tribal base roll as a citizen-by-blood. For both the Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma and the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma, the base roll is the Dawes Rolls, taken between 1898 and 1907 in Indian Territory. Generally, for tribes with no minimum blood quantum, applying for citizenship can be as simple as filling out the application and sending it to the tribal citizenship office, along with state-certified copies* of your birth certificate and the birth certificates of those people connecting you to your ancestor, and sometimes a copy of the base roll document containing the name and information of your ancestor. You can contact the tribes in question for more information on the process.

    * (Some tribes require originals. Don’t ask me why. I don’t think either of these tribes does, though.)

    I don’t know if you were being serious, but considering that I used to do this for a living, I thought I would offer my experience anyway — just in case.

    Demosthenes (09f714)

  29. Sorry Demosthenes, in our post modern America if one identifies as a Cherokee, a Choctaw or a Mohican he/she/it/they/etcetera are one and no one has the right to say otherwise. We are all Indians now.

    Most people don’t see it but the left is as dedicated to wiping out races as they are to wiping out sexes.

    Rev. Hoagie® (785e38)

  30. Funny how Elizabeth “Dances with Lenin” Warren is always wrong. Always.

    dfbaskwill (a0813f)

  31. Thanks for that link, nk. Very informative.

    felipe (b5e0f4)

  32. I’m getting my shotgun to see if I can shoot down some of that flying bacon, felipe.

    nk (dbc370)

  33. Robert P. George in the Washington Post

    In selecting Gorsuch, President Trump has without question fulfilled his pledge to appoint a justice in the mold of Antonin Scalia — a conservative intellectual leader. Even those of us who refused to get on the Trump train after his nomination have to acknowledge that.

    I don’t see why there should be any problem acknowledging that. There’s no reason for anyone to experience cognitive dissonance. If you want to have a problem, then the problem should be wondering how Donald Trump was able to do that.

    (He had a good sense of who the people were to whom this was important, even if he didn’t understand all the reasons it was important, and so he consulted various people, and named a list of 21 possible nominees, all of whom satisfied them; and he knew that other people who didn’t know the details so well felt it was important to name someone to the Supreme Court who was like Scalia. And he didn’t double cross them. For what reason would he want to??)

    Sammy Finkelman (8a673f)

  34. Meanwhile the GOP has rolled out the committee-level nukes and suspended the rules regarding a quorum to allow votes even with no Democrats present. The Treasury and HHS nominees sent to full Senate on unanimous votes. No word if the Dems will continue their boycotts.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  35. Sorry Demosthenes, in our post modern America if one identifies as a Cherokee, a Choctaw or a Mohican he/she/it/they/etcetera are one

    I’m a trillionaire.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  36. NJRob, for sure. They head gleefully up the stairs…and find a guillotine!

    Patricia (5fc097)

  37. Funniest bit on Chief Liz and cultural ignorance: http://heatst.com/politics/warren-devos-handshake/

    Patricia (5fc097)

  38. “Most people don’t see it but the left is as dedicated to wiping out races as they are to wiping out sexes.”

    – Rev. Hoagie

    Heaven forbid we lose another means of defining and oppressing each other.

    Leviticus (efada1)

  39. Laugh at them indeed….I prefer to paraphrase Col. Kilgore in Apocalypse Now…”God, but I LOVE the sound of liberals whining in the morning!”

    Bill Saracino (ad0096)

  40. re: Trump thinks judges sign bills.

    In midst of campaign, one of a thousand speeches, (If you were campaigning would you get through even one without looking stupid? Doubt it.) seized upon by vultures and wealthy college boys who don’t have the education enough to admit when they’re wrong.
    Classic movie reference [YouTube]

    The purpose of language is to communicate after all.

    papertiger (c8116c)

  41. grrr

    papertiger (c8116c)

  42. The only part wrong with that is “Trump thinks”.

    nk (dbc370)

  43. from the Instapundit- I’M GUESSING THAT POLITICAL LAWFARE WON’T BE AS ONE-SIDED AS IT’S BEEN IN THE PAST: Trump Files With FEC For 2020 Election Bid, Outmaneuvers Nonprofit Organizations.

    Shows profound understanding of the way civic really works.

    papertiger (c8116c)

  44. Gotta love how easy it is to just scroll to see if Leviticus already made the point I would make.

    And yes, what in the hell is wrong with eliminating the concept of race? I don’t see myself as a different race than any other person and I don’t think it’s some crime against my race or whatever Trump’s fans are worried about.

    Souter was worse than most, Scalia better than most. This guy will hopefully be more like the latter. Folks I respect here say this is a great pick so I’m glad Trump did the best he could with this. He’s getting so much wrong in such a short time that it’s a relief he didn’t totally blow something. And yet those who think that means all the bad is somehow overcome because of lifetime terms are badly miscalculating.

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  45. Rush Limbaugh said today that 7 Democrats (in the Senate) so far have indicated (they would not filibuster the nomination of Neil Gorsuch) including U.S. Senator Claire McCaskill of Missouri (which was carried by Donald Trump by double digits, and where she is up for re-election in 2018)

    And that means McConnell has 59 votes and would need only one more to invoke cloture without changing the rules.

    What’s probably going to happen is that Neil Gorsuch is going to be confirmed too late to affect anything in the current Supreme Court term – if it went at top speed he could be conformed in April, early enough to affect a few cases, and the timing and decision was probably made because of this faint hope or use of the failure of that to happen as possible politial ammunition)

    But that it will be before the next Supreme Court term starts in October.

    So, altogether, one and a half years (and most of the major, or legally controversial, cases for two years) will have been decided by a Supreme Court consisting of 8 justices.

    Sammy Finkelman (8a673f)

  46. @Kevin M:I’m a trillionaire.

    I have 26 trillion picodollars in my pocket right now.

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1)

  47. I love how the grassroots protesters of Gorsuch have preprinted signs saying how dangerous and extreme he is.

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1)

  48. @papertiger: Your link is worth quoting from:

    More importantly, 501(c)(3) nonprofit organizations would no longer be able to engage in “political speech” which could theoretically affect the results of the 2020 U.S. Presidential Election without running the risk of losing their nonprofit status. The move effectively bars interest groups from creating nonprofits which they could funnel money into for the purposes of opposing Trump’s initiatives. This will likely create chaos for political opponents of Trump such as George Soros, who has sunk significant amounts of money into various nonprofit groups with the intent of opposing Trump’s government.

    We told the left that campaign finance reform is just incumbent protection, and they didn’t care because they thought they would always have the incumbent.

    Well, now they get to learn the lesson.

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1)

  49. Yes, Gabriel Hanna those pesky “grassroots protesters” and they’re “spontaneous” too !!

    http://www.americanthinker.com/images/bucket/2017-01/197858_5_.jpg

    Rev. Hoagie® (785e38)

  50. @49– Actually, did you notice the ones printed with “OPPOSE…..” then a blank space where they could ink in the blank once they got the name of the nominee. Pretty much made it all look foolish. More interesting is how the seem completely unprepared on how to establish an opposition to him even three months after the election loss. They’re poorly led.

    This is the conservative ideologues bone thrown by pragmatist Trump. A conservative judge will get the seat for sure– maybe two. But the politics of it are shaping up to be a fascinating fight. CEO Trump says he wants G and for McConnell to go nuclear if necessary. Schumer has to show backbone after the Garland mess and risk other senators losing their seats in the next cycle. If he lets Gorluch through he looks useless. If he blocks him, the next conservative will get through anyway. The game is with McConnell and Schumer now. My guess is Schumer will cave on G as it’s only a few weeks into Trumps term and ride out the hell from his base for a few months. Short memories.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  51. @ Rev. Hoagie, #30:

    I know that you’re joking and making a point about the left, but I don’t care. I am native — provably — and I just don’t find that funny.

    To be fair to you…I’ve dealt with (too) many people who think that their family story about their rumored dusky-skinned, high-cheekboned, “Black Dutch” Cherokee great-great-grandmama somehow entitles them, on the mere claiming of it, to tribal citizenship and what they’re sure is a generous annual stipend from casino payouts. And I’ve had to be polite and courteous with those people, and pretend to take theirstory seriously, lest I find myself in my boss’s office being written up for unprofessional behavior. So I suppose I’ll never be in the position where that’s funny to me.

    Demosthenes (09f714)

  52. In honor of Lizzie Warren (and Demosthenes):

    A Native American family moved off the reservation and into a small town populated with white devils. The family had a 6-year-old boy who came home crying after his first day at his new school.

    “What is wrong, my son?” the boy’s father asked. “Why do you weep?”

    “The white children made fun of my name all day long,” the sobbing youngster replied. “Why do our people have such strange names? Why can’t I be called Billy, or Tommy, or Jimmy?”

    Taking the boy gently upon his knee, the father said, “Well, my son, it is an ancient Native American custom to give each of our children a name that is relevant to the circumstances of their birth. For example, on the morning that your brother was born, a great deer with huge antlers came bounding across the meadow. That is why we call your brother Running Buck. And your sister was conceived when we lived next to a beautiful mountain stream. That is why we call her Babbling Brook. Now, does that answer your question, Broken Rubber?”

    Deuce Frehley (8afd8b)

  53. Je suis vraiment fière de vous découvrir, votre blog est vraiment super !

    voyance gratuite amour (e8085e)

  54. @ Deuce Frehley, #54:

    Very good. You have proven that you are well-named. You are, indeed, nothing but a deuce.

    Demosthenes (09f714)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.3122 secs.