Thursday, March 17, 2016

SD Senators Thune And Rounds Are Playing Politics On Obama's SCOTUS Nominee. Do They Wonder Why The Trump Wrecking Ball Is Demolishing Our GOP?

     Anybody wondering how Donald Trump could suddenly emerge and become the scourge of my Republican Party need only look at the wussiness our SD Senators are showing on the
Thune And Mitch McConnell
Which One Represents South Dakota?
(photo from dailysignal.com)
Supreme Court nomination.
John Thune and Mike Rounds are the perfect paradigms of the "all talk, no action" catchphrase that practically defines the contempt shown to our leadership by Trump, much to the resounding endorsement that Trump's campaign has been getting by enough Republican primary voters to put him on track to be the party's nominee in November.  

     Both of these tools of national Republican Party politics are completely ignoring their responsibilities to represent us South Dakotans by blowing off the prospect of even meeting with the President's nominee for the court vacancy. It's ironic that both these Stepford Senators make a big show of their attachment to our region's values, Thune through his affiliation with Heartland Values PAC  and Rounds via his campaign rhetoric about being "most in line with South Dakota values."  In both cases, I think this categorical rejection of any consideration of Obama's nominee Merrick Garland  for SCOTUS is utterly unrepresentative of South Dakota values as I've seen them displayed.  Some outstanding South Dakotans I've come to know are keenly reflective and aware, looking at all sides of situations before reaching decisions. Unlike our Senators and their brush-off of Garland, they never say no to a proposition (or appointment) without close examination. How can anybody know if Garland is fit for the Supreme Court without vetting him first?  A priori rejection is supposed to be a South Dakota value?  Please.  The  people I know who most consistently espouse South Dakota values are successful entrepreneurs and professionals who independently examine and analyze their options before coming to conclusions and decisions.  That, to me, is the essence of successful decision-making and leadership.
    I also contend that the approach is the essence of the South Dakota way of doing things, the most defining value of all.  How that jibes with the yes-men we sent to the Senate is a mystery to me.  Thune in his statement issued yesterday claims that "the American people deserve to have their voices heard" on this nomination.  That's ridiculous because the process insures that Americans have their voices heard.  A President elected by the people and charged by Article Two in the U. S. Constitution (". . . he SHALL nominate," with "shall" being the controlling word in this compound verb) to make this appointment with the "advice and consent" of the Senate, a body filled with elected officials, does not fall short of Thune's standard for what the American people deserve.  If Thune and the rest of the Senate don't think Garland makes the SCOTUS cut, so be it.  The American people have had a hearing, loud and clear, via their elected reps.  
     Fact is, Thune got sent to the Senate on the expectations that he'd do his job, not jawbone with rhetoric cleared by GOP Central.  It's a shame that our senior senator is making himself such
Why Is This Man Laughing?
Mike Rounds Misquotes The Constitution
(photo from argusleader.com)
a prototypical archetype of the "all talk, no action" politico that has brought on the rise of Trump. Thune should stand aside, let the nomination go through its Constitutionally-mandated process, and show us South Dakotans that he represents our most valued principle, independent thought.  

     Senator Rounds comes up even shorter, actually having the gall to misquote the Constitution.  In his statement issued yesterday, Rounds, reciting from a letter sent by Mitch Mconnell to the President, claims that the Constitution says that "the President "may" nominate judges of the Supreme Court."  This is such an awful misrepresentation of the Constitution that it calls Mike Rounds' competence into question.  As I noted above, the Constitution is clear.  The President "SHALL" nominate, Senator Rounds.  It doesn't say he MAY nominate.  Get it?  There's a difference between "shall" and "may."  Obama is only following through on his Constitutional mandate.  It would be nice if Senators Rounds and Thune would stand up for themselves and us South Dakotans and do the same.
     
     

8 comments:

  1. Great article. Thune and Rounds have both followed the GOP leadership on EVERY ISSUE since their first day in the Senate. Neither seems capable of independent thought.

    ReplyDelete
  2. There is no time limitation on how long they take to consider a nominee. It's stupidity to openly shout that they won't even MEET with him, when all they need to do is drag their feet until the GOP nominee is chosen. If trump is the nominee, pass him through asap, and if Cruz, kill the nomination in the committee if they don't like him or reject him in the full Senate - but enough with these games that insult or intelligence.

    Unrelated aside: Ideas without ideology? Sounds like morals without morality. Ideology is what should inform your ideas, the principles and axioms of your identity. I would have said 'passion without partisanship'

    ReplyDelete
  3. The next Supreme Court Justice should be decided by the next President. Biden Rule. Stay strong Senators!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Are you sure you've got this right? I thought the Supreme Court got to choose the President.

    Actually, I believe Grassley and McConnell have to block the hearings on Garland because they don't have the actual votes to prevent senatorial consent.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I can see a scenario in which moderate Repubs would desperately want to get Garland confirmed to SCOTUS immediately: the interminable lawsuits generated if one party or another feels they got screwed by last minute rule changes the GOP convention. Do they want to bet the farm on the idea that the Roberts Court would not let Trump win those challenges?

    ReplyDelete
  6. John, your input into SDakota's media is appreciated by many. I feel these 3 federal reps we have are that in name only as they are only "Pete" and "Repeat"s of a political philosophy of hate expressed over the years of current POTUS' administration. Very much "The party of NO"!!!

    ReplyDelete