Why did no one think of this?!
On this blog, we have our tzaddik, RationalLeft.
"RationalPear" doesn't measure up.
Did this fruity social media user sleep throughout 2016 and 2024? Hillary Clinton literally warned us on the Supreme Court:
MADISON, Wis. — Hillary Clinton said Monday that the future of the Supreme Court would hang in the balance of the 2016 election, warning that Republican front-runner Donald Trump would bring division to the court if he was allowed to shape its future.
Clinton said Trump would roll back the rights of individuals and further empower corporations, pointing to his past statements about building a wall along the Mexican border and barring all non-citizen Muslims from entering the United States.
"In a single term, the Supreme Court could demolish pillars of the progressive movement," Clinton said at the University of Wisconsin. She pointed to the possibility of a Trump presidency, asking, "What kind of justice will a President Trump appoint?"
Or Vice President Kamala Harris, speaking after the Court overturned Roe v. Wade:
“This court has shown itself to be an activist court,” said Ms. Harris, who previously served as California’s attorney general and as the district attorney of San Francisco. “I worry about fundamental freedoms across the board.”
Asked what specific legal precedents could be undone by the court, Ms. Harris demurred, saying she was “hesitant” to do so.
“I don’t want to, at this point, use my voice in a way that is alarmist,” she said. “But this court has made it very clear that they are willing to undo recognized rights.”
Perhaps RationalPear was one of those people who refused to vote for Secretary Clinton because, as some said, even if Donald Trump were elected "we could just vote out the Supreme Court." Perhaps he was of a mind with Bernie Sanders' former spokeswoman, Joyeuse Fromage:
How's that working out now, Moldy Cheese?
People like the Pear, like Stinky Cheese, like so many others are so self-important, so grandiose in their belief of their own political and social nous, that they are incapable of doubt. Now, self-confidence is a good thing. Lord knows it's gotten me through a few things. But this is toxic self-confidence. It's a self-confidence which brooks no argument, which is fiercely self-assured of its own rightness. It again falls into the distinction I often make between moral certainty and moral clarity. They have the same moral certainty which leads them to laud abysmal dictatorships abroad because they are "anti-imperialist" and anti-Western. They have the same moral certainty possessed by Nazi Gauleiters and Soviet commissars. They have no sense of humility, or of the limitations of their world-view, by which their self-confidence becomes, as we so terribly see, destructive of everything around them.
It's not bad enough that we pragmatic liberals have to fight against the evil of the Right. We also have to contend with the self-centeredness of the Veruca Salt Left, demanding what they want when they want it and defecating on anything less than that. We truly are fighting a war on multiple fronts.
But unlike the Germans in World War II facing the rolling power of the Allies and Soviet Union, our adversaries are simply not that smart. They are so blinded by their own controvertible beliefs that they can't see where dangers might lay hidden. And that is our advantage. They can't believe that they're not right, that their nostrums are not self-evident, and thus don't foresee any possibility of counter-strikes. Both sides of the Horseshoe must be defeated and ground into political dust. They would make the world beggars and slaves. And I for one have a wonderful retirement planned.