Do Politicians Ever Mean What They Say? by Tom Reynolds
Referring to Vladimir Putin, Joe Biden said, “…this man cannot remain in power.” The White House staff immediately walked back Biden’s words as not meaning what they meant. The issue is not if Biden’s words were appropriate but that they were almost immediately disavowed by those speaking on behalf of Biden.
When questioned about his unsuccessful sanctions to deter Putin’s invasion of Ukraine, Biden said, “I did not say that…the sanctions would deter him.” Fox news and talk radio have played numerous quotes from Biden and his staff saying that sanctions would deter Putin. (Apparently, CNN and MSNBC were not able to find those same quotes.)
Biden said that the United States and NATO would respond "in kind" if Russia used chemical weapons in Ukraine. To those who regularly use the English language, that meant that the USA would respond with chemical weapons if Russia used chemical weapons in Ukraine. Once again, the English-speaking world had incorrectly interpreted Biden’s remarks, according to the clean-up crew at the White House.
Of course, Biden has a lifetime of such verbal misadventures. In 2008, he said of Barack Obama, “I mean, you’ve got the first sort of mainstream African American who is articulate and bright and clean.”
Which brings us to Biden’s nomination of Ketanji Brown Jackson (KBJ) to be the first black woman on the Supreme Court.
In 2005, Janice Rogers Brown, a black woman, was on George Bush’s short list to replace Sandra Day O’Connor on the Supreme Court. She (not KBJ) would have been the first black woman to ever serve as an associate justice of the Supreme Court. But – guess who – Joe Biden appeared on CBS’s “Face the Nation” to warn that if Bush nominated Brown, “I can assure you that would be a very, very, very difficult fight and she probably would be filibustered.”
Today, Biden calls the filibuster a “relic of the Jim Crow era.” Biden now wants to get rid of the filibuster and also claim credit for putting the first black woman on the Supreme Court. Again, we have the issue of Biden’s actual words being dishonest.
It would be nice if Supreme Court nominees were always the best person available but both major parties want Supreme Court justices who reflect their party’s philosophy; nothing new about that. But be honest about it and don’t nominate or reject someone based on race or sex. It would be nice if judicial decisions were decided outside of personal feelings but few people can put them completely aside and most Supreme Court nominees come from a political background.
Then, there is the issue of racism. Biden and the Left often speak of having a government which “looks like America”. America is 12% black. The Supreme Court is already 11% black. It aint gonna get any closer than that! Has Biden considered that another black Supreme Court justice puts that court out-of-step with looking like America?
Biden gets a two-fer by limiting his selection to a black woman, which was both racist and sexist. Ponder this: if he nominated a transexual woman, would the Left count a transitioned “woman” as a woman?
Is KBJ the best black woman available or the most likely to be confirmed black woman or the black woman most likely to view the law from a far-left radical perspective? The latter possibility is particularly worrisome, for several reasons.
There is the matter of those supporting her. Radical liberals support her and some of them actually recommended her. That says something that gun owners do not want to hear since those same radical liberals are inti-2nd Amendment.
And in a case of guilt by association, she’s distantly related by marriage to former House Speaker Paul Ryan. When KBJ was earlier nominated to the federal bench by President Obama in 2012, Ryan introduced her. Conservatives might sooner forgive her radical left relationships faster that one with RINO Paul Ryan.
And let’s not forget the issue of KBJ’s testimony. Can we believe her, any more than we can believe Joe Biden?
During an earlier Senate confirmation hearing, KBJ said she did not have a political philosophy. Now she says, "I'm very acutely aware of the limits on my power" and she has expanded on several issues in a way which made her sound like former Justice Antonin Scalia. Would Biden have nominated a Scalia look alike? About as likely as Nancy Pelosi voting for Donald Trump.
During her Senate hearing, KBJ was asked, “Can you provide a definition for the word ‘woman”? “No”, Jackson replied, “Not in this context…I’m not a biologist.” This is troubling from two standpoints: it shows too much concern for leftist political correctness that will probably influence her decisions; the woman who is being touted as the first black woman on the Supreme Court says she doesn’t know how to define a woman, which sounds remarkably like something Joe Biden would say.
KBJ has a history of defending criminals and even Guantanamo Bay detainees. In addition, she served on a sentencing commission. These raise the question, is she soft-on-crime and will she put criminals’ rights ahead of law-abiding citizens’ rights? A sentencing commission debate gives us some answers. Recidivism amongst released criminals is a problem and, in 2011, KBJ argued that longer sentences do not affect the rate of recidivism. The U.S. Attorney argued that while longer sentences may not affect the rate of recidivism, when criminals are in prison, “…they are not out committing new crimes”. KBJ was unmoved by such logic. With soft-on-crime issues being a major factor in increased crime rates, this should worry us. (And give us another reason to buy a new gun.)
Hanging in the balance is a lifetime appointment to a court where the Left expects activism of radical left appointees. Should we believe anything KBJ and Joe Biden say in order to get her confirmed?