A Ginsburg Gamble?

My Recent Posts

Encouraged to retire in the latter half of the Obama administration, Ginsburg wanted an extra year or three on the SCOTUS (Supreme Court of the United States) bench; and why should she deny herself that when Hillary Rodham Clinton was practically the next anointed President. So of course, she placed that bet; hang on and let Hillary name her replacement. It was a perfect cake eating and having scenario. 

 

But a funny thing happened on the way to retirement. Hillary aint President. Now what? Hope for impeachment (a leftist pipe dream)? Last time I looked the POTUS succession line was about five or six GOP deep. Maybe try to hang on for another four years? That might work; but what if that next election doesn’t pan out either… eight is entirely different; eight is a long, long time.

 

Me? I find the predicament quite humorous. 

 

 When your enemies are gnashing teeth and rending garments it makes for good theater. And I’ve always been a big fan of karma (when she’s not biting me on the ass).

 

I bring this up only because I recently read a proposal from conservative news CEO Chris Ruddy (Newsmax.com). Ruddy has suggested Trump extend an olive branch to the left; a deal if you may. He thinks that President Donald Trump should offer that deal to Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Retire now… and he will nominate… Judge Merrick Garland (President Barack Obama’s last nominee) to replace her.

 

I can’t say I’m in favor of the plan, but I can’t say I’m against it either. I’ve keep inching from one side to the over, more often than not against it.

 

Pro:
Ruth Bader Ginsburg (the least qualified member of the SCOTUS) will no longer be on the SCOTUS.

Con:
Ruth Bader Ginsburg will be replaced by a slightly less not qualified judge.

Side Note: Anyone who believes in a living Constitution is not qualified to be a judge (or to hold any appointed or elected office).

Pro:
You’re replacing an ultra-leftist jurist with a moderate.

Con:
A moderate is just someone who pauses in the center… before turning left.

Pro:
It’s always the moral thing to do to seek common ground, to seek compromise, to extend the olive branch to your opposition.

Con:
The left has and never will reciprocate. The olive branch will get you NOTHING in return (besides Ginsburg gone). And if you think you’re going to get something; you sure as ^%$# better get your end first, have it in writing, or have a means to ensure the terms are met.

 

When it comes down to it, it’s a gamble. Issues at hand mean literally life or death for tens of thousands… religious liberty or further persecution… free speech… gun rights… issues core to the fabric of a healthy (or sick) republic. You’re giving up the possibility of a major shift (in the right direction) in the SCOTUS for a little insurance that we will only trot to hell vs sprint. I just can’t make that deal… If we’re taking the country to hell, let’s do it at a dead (leftist) run… OR… turn around. I’m really not interested in anything in the middle (the trotting option).

 

Sure, there’s that nagging feeling of “should we make a deal”. Are we repeating the mistake of a proud old woman? And consider that our odds aren’t nearly as good as hers were…

Comments

Leroy Added Jul 9, 2017 - 10:48am
Great article, Lynn, and I agree with you completely.
 
I say take the gamble on her demise.  Despite all the noise, the probability is that Trump will be there for eight years.  If not Trump, like you pointed out, then a Republican.  The probability is that Ginsburg will no longer be with us, go senile, lose her mental faculties, or just give up.  Torture her by making her serve on a conservative court and seeing the Federal courts become more conservative.  I can think of no better karma.
 
It seems to be that justices are always left or right of what they claim.  Gorsuch seems to be more conservative than he let on to.  Roberts was more left.  Garland will be more left.
 
The deal might be better aimed at Roberts.  The arguments are the same against.  Karma would be seeing his ObamaCare decision overturned.
Bill H. Added Jul 9, 2017 - 11:25am
Good write, Lynn
Trump's M.O. has been to alienate and antagonize "the other side" (of who he was once a member) ever since he started his campaign. This is also evident with most of his staff appointees based on their former positions and views, along with his prior actions.
I am not sure at this point that any effort at all from him to offer an olive branch would have any effect at all, but it may be a start if he could keep up the pace. Everyone should realize that if their is no reasoning or discussion between the "sides" that the problems of hate and separation will simply worsen and result in the failure of everything this country stands for. There are many "Americans" who actually seem to enjoy the conflict and want to see this happen.
What we really need is a leader who would first work to unite the country. We once had one named John F. Kennedy and recently it appeared that Republican candidate John Kasich spoke of the right ideas.
 
Leroy Added Jul 9, 2017 - 2:59pm
If I am correctly calculating the odds, she has about 29% chance of not surviving through the next presidential election.  If Trump wins, as I suspect he will, she has about a 58% chance of kicking off before the end of his second term.  So, if Trumps wins the next election, the chances are that she won't be around to see the end.  Go with the odds. 
 
All that assumes that we don't know anything about her health. 
Now consider that she has had bouts of cancer and her odds are greatly diminished.  She is obviously frail.  Plus, you have to add in the chance of dementia and also the chance that she will just say the heck with it.  Maybe she will decide that sticking around just to be a pain in the derriere is not worth it.
 
Just pulling a number out of the air, I give Trump a 75% chance of naming her replacement.
TexasLynn Added Jul 12, 2017 - 9:39pm
Leroy... thanks for the kind comments.

>> I say take the gamble on her demise. Despite all the noise, the probability is that Trump will be there for eight years.
In the spirit of full disclosure, I did not vote for Trump; which is not to imply that I was insane enough to vote for the crook (Clinton), the nut (Stein) or the let's get high (Johnson) candidates.
That said, Trump won and is now MY President. I wish him well. I hope by the end of his first term he has done so much good for the country that I admit my mistake and vote for him the second time around. Gorsuch was a good start...
We'll see about the eight years. There are a lot of factors and I don't take anything for granted anymore.
>> If not Trump, like you pointed out, then a Republican.
My point here was that if the Democrats achieved their wildest dreams (impeachment), a Republican will still be President.
>> The probability is that Ginsburg will no longer be with us, go senile, lose her mental faculties, or just give up. Torture her by making her serve on a conservative court and seeing the Federal courts become more conservative. I can think of no better karma.

True, divine karma is likely in play here.
>> It seems to be that justices are always left or right of what they claim. Gorsuch seems to be more conservative than he let on to. Roberts was more left. Garland will be more left.
Agreed... observations tells us as much.
>> The deal might be better aimed at Roberts. The arguments are the same against. Karma would be seeing his ObamaCare decision overturned.
Since ObamaCare has already been before the court, it's doubtful to be the route of demise. Nor should that route even be necessary with the current makeup of Congress. BUT... as I've said before, the GOP will never be the solution to the nation’s problems. Their inability to act on health care is further proof of this fact.
The Democrats (left) are taking this nation straight to hell at a dead run and every now and then we elect enough Republicans to slow us down to a trot. Actually turning things around has never even been on the table. I hope Trump can be the guy to do that. But so far, the swamp is winning.
>> If I am correctly calculating the odds, she has about 29% chance of not surviving through the next presidential election. If Trump wins, as I suspect he will, she has about a 58% chance of kicking off before the end of his second term. So, if Trumps wins the next election, the chances are that she won't be around to see the end. Go with the odds.
Interesting calculation. I agree that Trump should "go with the odds". The possible overall good outweighs the minute gains of compromise.
>> All that assumes that we don't know anything about her health. Now consider that she has had bouts of cancer and her odds are greatly diminished. She is obviously frail. Plus, you have to add in the chance of dementia and also the chance that she will just say the heck with it. Maybe she will decide that sticking around just to be a pain in the derriere is not worth it.
All factors in this great poker game of SCOTUS politics. Getting back to the karma thing... I make it a habit to not wish for the ill health or death of anybody (with rare exceptions for Islamic terrorists and murderous dictators). So I hope she just decides it's just not worth it.
For example, I wish good health and fortune even to the likes of trolls like "John G". :)
>> Just pulling a number out of the air, I give Trump a 75% chance of naming her replacement.
I'm less optimistic... but that's my nature.
One factor not mentioned is the fact that it is entirely possible for the Republicans to lose the Senate in 2018. And all their hand-wringing and inaction is bumping up that probability every day. If that happens, who Trump can replace her with will be severely limited.
Again... thank you for the comments...
 
TexasLynn Added Jul 12, 2017 - 9:41pm
Bill H... thanks for the kind comments.
 
>> Trump's M.O. has been to alienate and antagonize "the other side" (of who he was once a member) ever since he started his campaign. This is also evident with most of his staff appointees based on their former positions and views, along with his prior actions.
 
That is true... and in some respects, it's refreshing (yes refreshing) to see someone stand up to the establishment (political and media) that have had free reign for so long.
 
Not that I'm even in the same league as our President; I've always had the opinion that if you're not $$#@ing off certain people... you're not doing it right.  (Here that John G?) :)
 
>> I am not sure at this point that any effort at all from him to offer an olive branch would have any effect at all, but it may be a start if he could keep up the pace.
 
The left has made it abundantly clear that no quarter will be given... so why give it?
 
>> Everyone should realize that if there is no reasoning or discussion between the "sides" that the problems of hate and separation will simply worsen and result in the failure of everything this country stands for. There are many "Americans" who actually seem to enjoy the conflict and want to see this happen.
 
We've been there for a while... Trump just brought it all to a head.
 
I really think we (as a nation) are beyond the point of reconciliation.  We had a good run.
 
>> What we really need is a leader who would first work to unite the country.
 
Yes... but... I have no faith or expectation such a man exists; no faith or expectation that it is even possible.  Again... my nature.
 
Please don't think this indicative of a gloomy, defeatist persona; I just reached a point where my faith is better placed not in this world, but the next... in God and Christ. :)
 
>> We once had one named John F. Kennedy and recently it appeared that Republican candidate John Kasich spoke of the right ideas.
 
I would agree with John F. Kennedy and Ronald Reagan.  As a conservative, I was not fan of Kasich but that would not preclude me from giving him a chance if elected President (just as I have with Trump)
 
Again... thank you for the comments...
TexasLynn Added Jul 12, 2017 - 9:42pm
John G... I would say thanks for the comments... but all you're really doing is trolling...
 
Despite my better judgment in feeding trolls...
 
>> An ultra-leftist?
 
Yes, Ginsburg is an ultra-leftist.
 
I can see and admit that there are justices on the court with far/ultra-right political leanings. If one cannot see/admit that far/ultra-left justices sit on the court (and that Ginsburg is one of them); that is more a comment on one's mental/political state than the court itself.
 
>> Good lord, you must be to the right of...
 
I promise you... I'm one of the most conservative people you have ever encountered. :) Fiscal, social, religious... :)
>> ... right of Hitler/Mussolini/Franco's righter wing right wing cousin.
 
That would be rather easy since fascism, socialism, and leftism go hand-in-hand.
 
Hitler and Mussolini were in fact leftist (thus the socialism in Germany). Franco, was simply a totalitarian aligned with the fascist. They were all embraced by the American left until the war (WWII) finally broke out. After the war, the left moved on to embrace communism (and eventually it's slightly less left wing cousin socialism).
 
The misnomer that fascism is on the right side of the political spectrum is due to decades of successful propaganda from the communists.
 
Leroy Added Jul 13, 2017 - 12:47pm
Lynn, I think the math is not behind the Democrats flipping the Senate.  The Democrats have far more seats up for grabs.  The Republicans would almost have to commit suicide.  It is possible with the direction they are headed.  They were given a gift and they are spending too much time inspecting the teeth to decide whether or not to accept.  The House is more probable than the Senate. 
 
As long as Trump remains popular, he has the upper hand.  The Republicans would be wise to get on board, like him or not.
 
I was a Cruz fan.
TexasLynn Added Jul 13, 2017 - 11:33pm
Leroy; I can see your math... Maybe the thin margin of the Senate is misleading.  I hope so.
 
Republicans have been given gifts many times that they squandered... I think it is possible (and likely) that they will do it again this time.  So far that has proven the case.
 
I too was (and still am) a Cruz fan.  That said, Trump is now my President and I want his agenda to be given a chance.  I agree the GOP needs to get on board.  The sooner the better.
Saint George Added Jul 16, 2017 - 10:15pm
You've obviously been heavily indoctrinated with US corporate propaganda
 
Nah, he's just read history and studied economics.
 
You might give that a try sometime.

Recent Articles by Writers TexasLynn follows.