While Republicans claim that it’s different this time, because the White House and Senate are controlled by the same party, Bill Whittle has no qualms about the GOP pushing through a replacement for the late Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg despite previous promises to wait for election results. After what Democrats did to Brett Kavanaugh, Whittle says the GOP should feel free to flip on the commitment made by Senators Lindsey Graham and Mitch McConnell among others.
Do conservatives still believe that a man’s word is his bond, or do situational ethics rule in politics and there’s nothing anyone can do to change that?
Background Resources:
‘You Would Do the Same’: Graham is Defiant on Supreme Court Reversal
[The New York Times, September 21, 2020]
Bill Whittle Now with Scott Ott is a production of our Members. Join us now.
Listen to the Audio Version
Bill Whittle Network · After What Democrats Did to Kavanaugh, GOP Free to Flip on Court Commitment
33 replies on “After What Democrats Did to Kavanaugh, GOP Free to Flip on Court Commitment”
I just wanted Scott to know he completely knocked it out of the park with his close on this video.
How do we get them back? How do we get angels back?
Even as a man who lost his deep religious sense a long time ago, the answer stares back at me straight in the face. Several of the founders mentioned this. Our system only works with a moral and religious people.
The purpose of religion is to pass morals and traditions from one generation to the next. And it has not escaped me that our rapid decline parallels our rejection of religion and the morals it teaches. The idea that there is something out there better than anything can ever be, but we are nonetheless better off striving to achieve it.
And Bill’s right. What good are these morals if we will not defend them, to the point where all of the good people are lying dead, and their ideas with them, condemning future generations to the control of evil?
The idea is still out there, but it’s a long claw back from apes to what we’ve achieved against our inner default forces of evil.
That is just it. Half the country, roughly, do NOT realize that’s the party the Democrats are — mainly because they have most of the media running interference for them.
Actually I think 10-15% of the country DO realize it and have no problem with it. 30% (including that 10-15%) will vote for the Democrat even if he’s caught raping children and bathing in kittens’ blood afterward. Those people probably don’t “know”, they’re just convinced it’s not true.
Then the other 15 or so percent MIGHT be persuadable. As you said, we’ll find out in 6 weeks.
There is no such thing as a fair fight. And if your opponent tries o grab your cojones, it is perfectly fair to punch him in the throat.ne3er play tit for tat in any contest.
Constitutional*Carry
There is certainly an argument to be utilized regarding the fact of the democrats moral dive into the Kavanaugh accusations and character assassination.
But I have not heard ANYONE bring up the concept that in 2016 the republican led senate gave their advice and consent by NOT voting on obama’s Supreme court nomination because that president was termed out, there was no way he could be re-elected.
In contrast, now in 2020 it is possible for President Trump to be re-elected and it makes sense to proceed with the nomination and confirmation process.
Just my $.02
https://youtu.be/nTh5JzRziHE?t=52
Be Nice. Until it is time; not to be nice.
https://youtu.be/hAFI5In7i2U
I think we are reaching clobberin’ time
Waffen-SS soldiers were murdering British soldiers captured during the retreat to Dunkirk. The Chieftain has an episode on Youtube covering it.
I know it’s been said in a right angle but an easy line to destroy the “but lowering yourself to their level makes you as bad as them” is this
“A civilized man can play a savage, but a savage can’t play a civilized man.” -Spock.
A civilized man or woman prefers to have the doorknob on the inside of a room instead of on the outside. It’s called freedom. Sometimes to you have to fight to keep it that way.
“Do unto others as you would have them do unto you”, the well known “Golden Rule”, is not a namby-pamby, pie-in-the-sky ideal spoken by a religious zealot a couple millennia ago. The Man credited with those words, due to his very nature, knew exactly what he was saying.
He was saying that you demonstrate to others what sort of treatment you merit from them by the character of the treatment you render to them. This is a guide in the matter of dealing with others.
If both sides treat each other with honor and compassion in good faith, then that’s a balance. Both sides have agreed to a set of rules that they will abide by.
If one side takes advantage of the other’s honor and compassionate good faith for its own gain, that’s not balanced. The side taking advantage is showing the other side what sort of treatment they deserve by demonstrating clearly the means they will go to in order to prevail. The side taking advantage has established the rules for treating with them.
This is why you should deal with others in the manner you would like to be dealt with, because if you do not do that there are consequences.
Many rivalries both external and internal to the United States have followed this course to the degree appropriate. When Japan attacked the United States of America we engaged them in all out war the result of which was to pull them BACK to a position where they would deal with America in the honor and good faith America had been and wanted to continue to deal with them. The same goes for Germany. Both are now allies of the U.S. rather than foes.
China cheats on trade, America fights back. Iran cheats on nuclear development, America fights back. Etc. This is the way it should be because those hostile to America and/or seeking unfair advantage have demonstrated how they deserve to be treated.
These things are not arbitrary or subjective. You get as good as you give, that’s not only the way it is in life, it’s a moral and just position too.
What’s sad is that even though the great majority of actors on the world stage have discovered that this lopsided balance of honor and good faith has short term gains with long term losses being very nearly guaranteed … The Democrat Party has chosen to use that sort of tactic. It is an immoral and unjust approach, an attempt to take advantage of the “better angels” of their opposition. This cannot be allowed to stand because as I just pointed out, the end result is destructive nearly universally.
It doesn’t really matter “who started it” and that’s a very slippery position to nail down. What matters is that the transgressors can revert to honor and good faith but refuse to do so. With the matter in question in this video, the Democrat Party has long demonstrated a willingness to take advantage of the Republican’s good faith and high moral stance sufficiently that now that bad faith position is imposing their narrative, agenda and will on the rest of us.
Scott argues that “about half the nation” are Democrats. That makes that half the nation responsible for the actions of their party, it does not absolve them magically because they’re not “that kind of Democrat”. They are responsible for the actions of their party and have voted those who use malignant double standards into power. When you see a Democrat saying “I don’t agree with _____ (fill in the blank; political malfeasance, rioting, burning, looting, killing innocent people both born and pre-born, etc., etc.,, etc.,) the only answer is —
“Then why do you support the party that does those things? Do you not realize that if you do those things long enough those same tactics will be used against you? Are you stupid or just evil? Or both?”
I understand that precedent was invoked in the decisions to consider or not consider the nominee for supreme court justice. When Obama made the appointment the presidency and senate were held by opposing parties and precedent shows that the nominee was not confirmed in an election year. When the presidency and senate were held by the same party precedent shows the nominee was confirmed in an election year..
I wish everyone would watch a netflix documentary called The Social Dilemma. This has opened my eyes to the possibility of large scale manipulation. There can now be multiple truths for the populace. These AI’s can be used to create these truths. I look at the other side and think how can they be so stupid and they look at me and ask the same question. It all boils down to where we get our information. These tech giants with there AI’s are polarizing our country for profit. Do I think this applies to politicians no. I think they are interested only in power but as Scott puts it half of the country is democrat. If I as a conservative and my leftist counterpart go the search for information on our devices we can use exactly the same search phrase on the same search engine and get different results. This is a huge problem.
I disagree. There is only THE TRUTH. What the AI’s create is a distortion of the truth which is passed off as fact.
The masters of these AI’s use that distortion to manipulate the unaware and the easily led. they create an army of useful idiots, to act as foot-soldiers in their war on the principles that the US was founded upon, and by extension, the Republic itself. It’s Marxism 101.
Principles are not, nor should they be, rigid and applied & held no matter the context. You are still an honest man if you don’t tell the truth to the man at your door asking where your children are while carrying a bloody axe. That man has forfeited his right to the truth so you are under no obligation to give it to him.
Specifically regarding the SCOTUS vacancy, I wrote this yesterday:
Note what I said about the simple facts of the 2016 & 2020 nominations: the President nominated and the Senate decided. That is perfectly normal. Nothing else matters.
In general, however, principles are always applied in some context. It’s not that principles (or morals) are subjective or relative – they are objective, reality-based. But principles are contextual. If they were not, there would be no such thing as a self-defense justification for killing someone. Principles are firm and unchanging, but they are far more complex than merely “Thou shalt not kill.”
The same principle can be applied to two different situations and produce two different results, yet that principle will not have been violated. It is the context in which the principle is applied that determines the proper course. Contexts, though, can be exceedingly complex. What exactly happened? What is my involvement, if any? What effect does the event have on me? What effect will my response have? On me? On others involved? What is the severity of the act in question? Will engaging in this or that response make any difference? What kind of difference? The answers to those kinds of questions, drilled down to the level necessary to make an objective assessment, will determine the proper application of the relevant principles.
Also, you do not sink to the level of your opponent (assuming your opponent is the one on the lower moral level – always examine yourself thoroughly!) if you need to adopt his tactics in order to defeat him. He forfeited the right to equal treatment by acting to impose the wrong. This varies with the severity of the wrong, of course, but once again the context determines both which principle applies and the proper application of that principle.
The full explanation of all this would fill a book. It encompasses much, much more than would fit into even this lengthy comment. But the gist is this: no one on the side of proceeding with the SCOTUS nomination process is violating their principles by doing something different than in 2016. Even if they themselves don’t know it.
Agreed. As Joe Biden said before the dementia when he was asked about Obama nominating “the constitution says SHALL nominate and the sente gives a fair hearing. No one is required to vote for thr nominee.”
Excellent comment. I love the “man with the bloody ax”. Seriously, a very logical and objective assessment. Thank you
Thank you! I’ve worked hard over many years to develop my understanding of such things. It’s nice to know I’ve done OK. 🙂
This is very well put. You’ve sliced away all the brush and gotten to the heart of the matter. All the window dressing about this year vs. that year or who said what when and then flipped is just a distraction.
Bill is also absolutely right. It’s time to stop playing nice. The best part about Trump is that he stands up to them, and his superpower is that he makes them say all the quiet parts out loud. He’s made them stop pretending. He’s broken them.
Thanks. 🙂 I always hope to express myself in a way that makes sense and can be understood yet covers the issue deeply and broadly enough that the fundamentals are shown.
Sorry, Scott. I must vehemently-disagree with your closing assertion. These sort of conversations, which I define as attack/gotcha interviews, “bug me” because they stem from a form of irrationality and/or insanity that the world would be better without. I realize the world is full of folks who approach life in this fashion: tear others down to improve one’s standing. However, I despise it.
Bill’s position is 100% correct — this is war. Like the Marines of past wars, we aim to win it — even it it requires our “hands” to be sullied.
ADDENDUM:
For all who subscribe to the tactics of attack/gotcha interviews as good, here’s something to remember:
I think that Scott’s role is to force Bill to defend his position and therefore make that position more clear. I think it’s a good format.
I understand all that. I was disagreeing with Scott’s final assertion that listeners exist in political bubbles and that is the reason why exchanges like this bug them. I refuse to accept the notion that I am alone in my irritation at the “gotcha’ interviews while NOT living in a political bubble. There are exceptions to ALL rules.
I think these setups can bug two different kinds of people, those like you who are more well versed in Bill’s side (and I, who can barely stand to listen to the Dem lies on customer TVs when I am in their houses working and the commercial break comes on the show they are watching) and those loony bubble livers who have had their whole life in an echo chamber and hear something that sounds like what they hear, but taken apart in such a way they cannot believe it is the “Truth” of their side… which is why they need to hear more and see the Truth of their “Truth”.
I hear you.
I could not bear to listen to our previous, “beloved” President’s voice, because everything he said sounded like a lie to me in spite of his acclaimed smooth-talking persona. Don’t get me started talking about shrill freaks like Pelosi and Schumer.
I went with less of “in spite of” and more “because of” that smooth talking persona. At least when he was on prompter (oddly both boss and follower seem to have that same issue, though follower is having problems even following that up).
There was a comparison I made between Pres 43 and 44 when people were complaining about 45’s manner of speech. “Do you want someone closer to the slick talking salesman who you cannot believe or the trip-over-his-tongue guy who cannot lie? When someone has no brain/mouth filter you get it all from him and you know exactly what he is thinking. Isn’t that what we want in a politician?”
Of course, a lot of the people either didn’t get it or didn’t like it but I couldn’t do anything about that.
It looks like Scott wants to bring a knife to a gun fight
We are fighting for the life of our republic and our individual rights. Take no prisoners. Crush them totally. They have lost ANY claim to being respected BECAUSE they intend to destroy us. After this election, there should be no existent left of left party. To allow otherwise is to commit suicide. They should be treated exactly the same as ISIS BECAUSE they have identically the same goal: the end of America as America followed by a totalitarian takeover.
Trump: 2020!
Agreed. They have abandoned reason and civility, embracing full-on nihilism and destruction. (Even of themselves,though I’m sure they have no idea of that.) They deserve to be ended as a political force and wiped out as a physical force. Forget neocon “Just War Theory,” end the threat overwhelmingly!
Thank you thank you thank you! I’ve been preaching this for at least the past year. We are at war but most Americans are like frogs in the pot of water which WAS turned on low heat. That pot is boiling and we are being cooked.
Another Lazarus Long incident: Someone once asked him why he shot the gunslinger in the back. He replied, well, he’s dead, and I’m alive, and that’s the way I wanted it to be.
I know of 3 former life long Democrats that switched to Republicans this year and plan to vote for Trump.
I sure hope that’s a trend!
Good for them and for us! VOTE TRUMP 2020 as if our very lives depend on it and the truth is it does!