Skip to main content

The Collins factor

Sen. Susan Collins (R-Me) says that she would oppose any Supreme Court nominee "hostile" to abortion rights. That's a big deal because a single Republican voting against President Trump's upcoming Supreme Court nominee would be enough to doom the nomination.

Meanwhile, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer is predictably beating the drums against the confirmation of an "ideological" nominee (which are perfectly fine when a Democrat is in the Oval Office and the ideology being promoted is Schumer's).

Here's the thing: most Americans want abortion rights restricted. According to Gallup, that's been the case ever since 1994 (the figure is currently 53%). The notion that the status quo enjoys the support of the majority of the American people is a delusion just as firmly embedded in the minds of leftists as the delusion that Donald Trump has anything to do with the present favorable state of the economy is among the extremists on the other side of the political divide.

The left has been using logically and constitutionally dubious court rulings to impose its values on the American people for far too long. The defeat of President Trump's nominee (assuming- and I do so assume unless he or she proves to be otherwise- that it will be of a justice as well-qualified as Neil Gorsuch) would be the one thing that could convince me to do something I have until now ruled out: go to the polls this fall and vote Republican.

Nor am I alone. It's Susan Collins and the Democrats who are out of step not only with the American people but with reason here. The defeat of Mr. Trump's nominee on ideological grounds- a stunt the Democrats have pulled before, but which Republicans have traditionally foregone- will have one certain effect: the next Democrat in the White House will have zero chance of getting any Supreme Court nominee confirmed with Republican support. Nor should there be any.

As for Sen. Collins, her odd statement was worded in such a way that she didn't appear to rule out voting for a nominee who hasn't openly expressed opposition to Roe v. Wade. Given the possibility that cases involving abortion rights might come before them, it's unlikely that anyone that President Trump would nominate will have done so. This may be simply a matter of Sen. Collins- a liberal whom the New York Times and other leftist news organizations are fond of mischaracterizing as a "moderate-" covering her left flank in the face of a nomination which will very likely change the character of the Court from a rogue branch of the government misusing the power of judicial review to trash the separation of powers and dictate public policy according to the justices' person whims into a deliberative body which will once again be about the business of honestly and objectively interpreting the Constitution and the law in general.


Popular posts from this blog

"The Handmaid's Tale" is stupid

No, Elizabeth Moss. Restricting the ability of American women to sentence their unborn children to death on a whim would not transform the United States into the misogynistic nightmare The Handmaid's Tale calls "the Republic of Gilead."

Neither Margaret Atwood's silly, paranoid tale about the Christians who are coming to get you or Hulu's adaptation of it is "timely" (Washington Post), "chillingly real" (San Francisco Chronicle), or  has any special "relevance to Trump's America" except insofar as through it the disconnect between reality and the lurid imaginations of the cultural left have demonstrated yet again that our delusional president isn't the only one who is bonkers.

No. The Christians are not out to get you. Not even the Fundamentalists. You could make a pretty good case that the "progressives" are, though.

If you go to a public university, you had better agree with the left or you will be in danger of n…

McMullin, Kasich, Hickenlooper, Huntsman, or somebody else sane in 2020!

I don't expect to be disenfranchised in 2020. I'm looking forward to Evan McMullin running against President Trump and whatever left-wing extremist the Democrats nominate. McMullin may or may not run for the Senate next year, and he may or may not run for president as an independent again next time around, but the nation can't afford to lose its most eloquent and intelligent critic of the populist takeover of the Republican party and the Executive Branch. We need the man in public life.

But interesting alternatives have developed. Ohio Gov. John Kasich has been mentioned as a potential primary challenger for Mr. Trump. I hope somebody continues the fight for the soul of my former party, even though I believe it to be a lost cause. Entrepreneur Mark Cuban is reportedly also considering a challenge to Mr. Trump. While I tend to see him at this point as somewhere to the left of where a candidate I would feel comfortable supporting might be, I would wish him well. Still, I see…

A modest proposal for a shocking innovation which is completely within the rules but which would, if adopted, revolutionize college football

I call it defense.

The idea- crazy as it may sound- is to supplement the scoring of points by your offense with an attempt to stop the other team from scoring them. Yeah, I know.  Really "out there," isn't it? But it has a history of winning not only games but championships. Modern college teams should try it more.

I'm a bit bummed about the Rose Bowl outcome but amused by the score. It seems that certain conferences aren't sure whether they're playing college football or high school basketball! I've noticed that in the scores of Sooner games. Last season the nation's college teams set a record by scoring an average of slightly more than 30 points each per game. That's a lot. Historically, that's a REAL lot.

The final score of the Rose Bowl was 54-48, though to be fair that was in double overtime. But to get there, the teams had to be tied 45-45 at the end of regulation! Last year was even worse. Southern Cal beat Penn State 52-49- in regulat…