This is one of Bill Whittle’s best efforts, incisive as it is humorous. He makes the interesting point that the MSM’s biased suppression of relevant news is, itself, a form of fake news.
Dahlia Lithwick, Slate’s correspondent for the courts and law, is apoplectic that the right did not consider Obama’s nomination of Merrick Garland (see Ms. BWR’s analysis here) for the Supreme Court, and now will never do so. She wrote about this recently in Republicans Stole the Supreme Court. Ms. Lithwick cites no legal or Constitutional authority to support her charge of nefarious action. Her crie de coeur is based solely on notions of fairness – something always important to progressives, but only when it can be argued favorably for them.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell refused to schedule hearings on Garland, stating that such an appointment should be a decision for the next President. That was a political decision that the American people just recently had an opportunity pass judgment upon.
I believe it was no less a personage than President Obama who, days after his victory in 2009, told America “elections have consequences.” Indeed, he said it as justification for ramming a series of acts through Congress without even the slightest attempt to reach across the aisle. I recall exactly zero progs complaining about the unfairness of that in 2009, nor the trickery Harry Reid used to pass the Affordable Healthcare Act later in the year so that it would not have to undergo a final vote in the Senate — a vote the progs would surely have lost after a Republican was elected to fill Ted Kennedy’s vacant seat. Nor did I hear a peep from the left in 2013 when Harry Reid overturned the Senate’s filibuster rule – a rule whose history dated back to 1806 – in order to pack the DC Court of Appeals with progressive judges.
Ms. Lithwick’s histrionics aside, the fact that control of the Supreme Court was at issue was dominant in the election. A nationwide exit poll shows that 61% of voters stated that the Supreme Court nomination was important, or most important, in their decision to vote. The people have spoken.
Question 1: Assuming that the first 100 days are not taken up entirely with architectural redesigns of the new Trump Palace, what five things would you like to see our new President Donald and his new administration address? My own list would be:
- Nomination for the Supreme Court (preferably Ted Cruz)
- Repeal and Replace Obamacare
- Withdraw all Executive Orders entered during the past 8 years
- Place a moratorium on all regulations that went into effect during the past 8 years until such time as they are reviewed and approved by Congress
- Formally end the Iran Deal and demand that they cease their nuclear program.
Bonus Question: Who would you like to see President Donald appoint to his new administration and to what position?