I think it's quite interesting how when some famous people die folks are always quick to say what a good person they were, and how influential and important they were in their chosen field, regardless of how hurtful and offensive their actions were to some people while they were alive. "You might not agree with his positions, but you can't deny that he was a giant in his field and a scholar and a gentleman".
Muammar Gaddafi was a heck of a dictator; you might not agree with his methods, but you can't deny his results. He was a giant among dictators.
I think you all know where I was going. Antonin Scalia passed away in his sleep Friday night, and it has left the American political world in turmoil. Wingnuts are losing their collective minds and they drew a line in the sand before the man's body was on the coroner's slab.
To them, this means war. No way will this bi-racial Socialist get to choose yet another Supreme Court Justice.
This is all compounded by the fact that the court has five* so called "liberal" Justices and five*so called "conservative' Justices. This next appointment will shift the balance of power on the highest court in the land for years to come.
I am still not sure where republicans are coming from when they declare that the president should not even appoint someone to replace Scalia. "He needs to wait until after the elections and let the next president decide", is what almost all the republican candidates for president are saying.
I must be missing something. Is the president supposed to stop being president with almost 11 months left to go in his presidency? He would be failing to live up to his constitutional responsibility by not appointing a new Supreme Court Justice. Why should Americans have to live with a divided court for the next year and maybe more? That is not the American way.
Republicans are saying that this matter should be decided by "the people" and not this president because of his ideological leanings. But there is one problem with this argument: This same president was elected TWICE by "the people", so what is the problem here? Rhetorical question. We know what the problem is, this is politics as usual, and it is compounded by the particular individual who is sitting in the White House at this particular time in our history.
Still, I am glad to hear that the president is going to be moving forward with his appointment. It would have been very disappointing if he allowed himself to be bullied by these demagogues and political agitators on the right. Now, at least, there will be a fight, and it is one that he should be relishing.
To use a sports metaphor; scoreboards don't lie, and the scoreboard says that President Obama is winning this battle.
"..these are responsibilities that I take seriously as should everyone" that are "bigger than any one party." "They are about our democracy, and they are about the institution to which Justice Scalia dedicated his professional life in making sure it continues to function as the beacon of justice that our Founders envisioned..."
*(There are nine justices on the court, and there is currently a 4/4 ideological split;not 5/5 as the post incorrectly stated. Not sure where mind was.
Getting ready for the NBA All-Star game,maybe)