‘CHUCKIE’ SCHUMER: LIAR, HYPOCRITE, HACK, AND, OF COURSE, DEMOCRAT…

At the risk of being accused of beating a dead horse here, I have to say that I really get tired of hearing about how it’s the Democrats who always operate above the political fray.  And it was once again that, just this past Sunday, we had Chuckie Schumer doing his best to portray his Democrat Party as somehow being the ardent defenders of the Constitution while it’s the Republicans who seek only to undermine it, when, actually, it’s just the opposite that’s so very true. During a Sunday morning appearance on ABC’s “This Week,” with George ‘Stephy’ Stephanopoulos, Schumer decried the intent of many Senate Republicans to prevent Barry “Almighty” from appointing the successor to the recently deceased Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia.

It was after hearing him spew his ideological drivel that I was left wondering if the good senator, from New York, might actually be suffering from, perhaps, what would be at least a mild case of Dementia since it was less than a decade ago that we heard from this the very same Democrat an advocating for doing exactly the same thing he’s now accusing the Republicans of planning.  That if any additional Supreme Court vacancies opened under former then President George W. Bush, none should be confirmed.  Now of course ‘Little Stephy’ Stephanopoulos, former Clinton hack and wannabe journalist, can always be counted on not to question Democrats regarding any of their previous statements.  Schumer knew ‘Stephy’ wouldn’t confront him, so he once again lambasted the Republicans. 

It was almost immediately after Justice Scalia’s death was announced this past Saturday evening that Republican lawmakers and presidential candidates began arguing how it is that the appointment of his successor should be left to the next president.  And about how for the last 80 years, or so, it has essentially been political precedent that during an election year a decision of such paramount importance as the naming of someone to what is essentially a lifetime appointment, should not be done by a lame-duck president.  But as we all know, Barry has never been one to abide by past precedent, only in setting new precedent. And Schumer, of course, supports Barry and lamented the Republican outlook as nothing but obstructionism, pure and simple.

Schumer said, “You know, the kind of obstructionism that Mitch McConnell ‘s talking about, he’s hearkening back to his old days.”  Then this sleazy hack went on to say, “In 2010, right after the election or right during the election, he said, ‘My number-one job is to defeat Barack Obama,’ without even knowing what Barack Obama was going to propose. Here, he doesn’t even know who the president’s going to propose and he said, ‘No, we’re not having hearings; we’re not going to go forward to leave the Supreme Court vacant at 300 days in a divided time.'”  Chuckie added, “When you go right off the bat and say, ‘I don’t care who he nominates, I am going to oppose him,’ that’s not going to fly.”  But McConnell is doing nothing more than to take Schumer’s own advice.

I say that because what McConnell is proposing is virtually no different than what Schumer himself proposed not so long ago.  And as we roll the tape we can see how it was, back in 2007 and while George W. Bush was still president, that Schumer can be heard advocating the exact same approach McConnell is now planning to pursue. During a speech at a convention of the American Constitution Society (a group that claims its mission is to "promote the vitality of the U.S. Constitution and the fundamental values it expresses: individual rights and liberties, genuine equality, access to justice, democracy and the rule of law), Schumer said that if any new Supreme Court vacancies opened up, Democrats should not allow Bush the chance to fill it “except in extraordinary circumstances.” 

And it was also back at that same time that Schumer was also heard to say, “We should reverse the presumption of confirmation.” Adding, “The Supreme Court is dangerously out of balance. We cannot afford to see Justice Stevens replaced by another Roberts, or Justice Ginsburg by another Alito.”  And it might also be worth noting here that it was during this same speech that Schumer would go on to lament the fact that he hadn’t managed to block Bush’s prior Supreme Court nominations.  And you know, about McConnell saying that his number-one job was to defeat Barack Obama, hasn’t Schumer seen his job as being doing all that he could to bring about the defeat of every Republican president who had held office during his tenure in Congress?  Seems that way to me!

And I think it also worth noting that when Schumer made his remarks in 2007, then President Bush still had about seven more months remaining in his presidential term than Barry “Almighty’ now has remaining in his.  Much like Republicans today, Schumer’s sentiment was clearly based on a fear that another Bush appointment would radically shift the overall makeup of the Court’s ideology.  Of course, Schumer’s attitude back then provoked a response from Republicans very similar to the one Democrats are making now.  Bush’s Press Secretary Dana Perino argued at the time that Schumer’s statements showed “a tremendous disrespect for the Constitution” and amounted to “blind obstructionism.”  My only point here is that it’s rather hypocritical to say Democrats don’t engage in such activities.

And as it just so happened, Schumer’s suggested obstruction never came to pass, as no more vacancies opened during Bush’s presidency.  But that does nothing to alter the fact that had such an opportunity presented itself there should be very little doubt regarding what would have ensued because we know how things would have played out.  And I’m also quite sure that when the Democrats regain control of the Senate after this year’s election, and Schumer replaces ‘Dirty Harry’ Reid not only as leader of the Senate Democrats but of the Senate as well, we will be about to count on the fact that Schumer will play politics, and to the greatest extent possible, with judicial appointments should it be a Republican who wins the White house, however unlikely that may be. 

So look, as you can see it becomes pretty clear, pretty quickly, that the Republicans are not to be afforded the luxury of being able to play by the same rules that the Democrats get to play by.  But at least part of the blame for that rests solely upon our limp-wristed Republican leadership in Congress.  Because once you are perceived as being a pushover that’s pretty much how you will then continue to be treated.  And until we have Republican leaders who possess the requisite balls to dish it out to the Democrats instead of simply bending over and spreading ‘em, this kind of belligerence on the part of Democrats will continue.  This is yet another reason why people are so pissed off and why Trump remains the Republican frontrunner.  No one trusts the Republicans to stand up for those who put them into office!