A Screw-Up’s Nuts & Bolts M.O.

This a.m., I gave a listen to the live coverage of Amy Coney Barrett’s Senate confirmation hearing.

From the right side of the aisle, many of her Republican Senator cohorts took to shamelessly, inordinately heaping on their praise; some even going so far as to answer the very questions, which they had prepared for her. It’s as if they had deemed her so incompetent that, sans their help, she’d be at a loss for words? I kept on yelling at my radio,

“Damn it, Mr. Republican, you’re not the one applying for the freakin’ job! She is! Why don’t you just let this book-smart woman speak for herself? America and the rest of the world would rather hear her out!”

Re the left side of the aisle, I can only hope that the Democratic Senators’ oft insightful, people oriented guidance will, someday, help correct her lifeless, blah, corporate myopia; help her more clearly see our Founding Fathers’ vision for America.

To cite one example, Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT), had expressed his concerns re Barrett’s talks with Donald J. Trump. He then asked, pointedly, if her nomination had been contingent upon her taking orders from the Oval Office.

In other words / my own words…

If confirmed, would Barrett help Dictator Donny subvert the highest court of the land? Flagrantly aid and abet his, reprehensible voter suppression plot? Allow him to stay in power until he’s 100+ years old? Willfully collude to help him burn up the U.S. Constitution and burn down America?

While Barrett did insist that there had been no such discussion, what if Trump had asked her a more… wink – wink… general question; oh, say, “Will you ALWAYS rule in my favor, NO MATTER WHAT?” After all, that would be the ONE and ONLY qualification that’d ever be of interest to him.

Obviously, such a Q would only require her “Yes!”; and with nary a mention of voter suppression, to boot! Furthermore, would that 3-letter, monosyllabic, 1-word reply even qualify as a discussion?

Let’s discuss this more abstractly, too. What about Barrett’s outside the courtroom conduct?

My thoughts now flashback to Barrett’s 09/26/2020 public White House appearance; known to our pandemic experts as a COVID-19 superspreader event; known to off-the-record White House staffers as The Rose Garden Massacre; a.k.a. the suspected ground zero site, where Trump, himself, had gotten infected.

Think of it! Against the backdrop of the worst global pandemic to plague humankind since 1918, Barrett showed up at her White House coming out party sans mask. Granted, she had already been infected with and recovered from COVID-19. Even so, one would think that this debutante would’ve walked away from her sickbed with a newfound concern / respect for the rest of humanity?

Even if grand scale thinking is above her pay grade, could she not localize it? What of her husband and kids? Their extended family? Circle of friends? Coworker networks?

And, to put another legal spin on this, how could a law and order judge, no less, ever be a party to reckless / public endangerment? Depending on the harm done, that crime is either a misdemeanor or felony.

Barrett’s Rose Garden appearance, in itself, attests to her disregard for time-honored science; which, regardless of which courtroom she’ll call “home”, it’ll not bode well re her rulings related to Obamacare, women’s rights, climate change and the pandemic, etc. BTW, when Senator Leahy had asked her how many people, stateside, have tested COVID positive, she couldn’t even ballpark it.

From what I’ve witnessed, so far, I’m deeply concerned about this SCOTUS judge wannabe’s cavalier attitude. But why would that even be surprising to any of us? Just take a gander at who nominated her!

While there’s little doubt that Amy Coney Barrett knows the nuts and bolts of the law, it’ll be her interpretations that’ll screw everything up.

Stay Publicly Masked!
Stay Safe at Home!
Stay Healthy!

-30-