Then, with voices shaking, multiple senators effectively accused Barrett of plotting mass murder. It was despicable, and it also once again turned the Supreme Court into a political instrument for the Democrat party.
 |
| Barrett doesn't need notes |
Andrea Widburg . . . "In this case, the Democrats opened not by attacking Barrett (although they did that, too). Instead, they repeatedly attacked the proceedings themselves, saying they were a sham and therefore illegitimate. They also invoked Ruth Bader Ginsburg, as if she were a saint rather than a government employee who misused her power. These attacks had a purpose. Beginning in 2021, whatever happens next, whether the Democrats win and pack the Court or lose and decide not to abide by its rulings, the foundation will have been laid at this nomination hearing: a Court with Amy Coney Barrett on it is no Court at all.
"Because the Democrat senators knew they could not possibly make the case that Barrett belonged to a rape gang while in high school, they had to demean her in a different way. They ultimately decided to paint Barrett as a mass murderer. Doing this required striking a fairly delicate balance. Barrett is openly pro-life, which means she opposes the slaughter of those 61 million innocents who have been aborted since 1973.
"The avenue for painting the mild-mannered mother of seven as a person barely better than Ted Bundy was to say, in effect, that she was going to murder Obamacare and, by doing so, kill women and children. The hook for this argument can be found in the fact that the Supreme Court will hear an Affordable Care Act case on November 11. The pivot for that case is the 2017 legislation doing away with the tax penalty that was the mechanism Obamacare used to force people to buy insurance." . . .
