Apparently Senator Chuck Grassley is fine with Supreme Court Justices who are ideologues, as long as their ideologies reflect extremist conservative ones. But boy howdy, once he feels betrayed, which he obviously does by Chief Justice Roberts, watch out.
This six-minute rant fell off the rails in the first minute or so, and went downhill from there.
The confirmation process has gotten political precisely because the Court itself has drifted from the Constitutional text and rendered decisions based instead on policy preferences. In fact, many of my constituents believe with all due respect that the chief justice is part of this problem.
Is this where I remind Senator Grassley that the point of leadership is to tell your constituents the truth instead of making up a fantasy game where they get all their ponies and unicorns because Bush appointed John Roberts?
Presumably, the unsaid beef has to do with Roberts' swing vote on the Affordable Care Act decision in 2012, something most hard-right wingers haven't forgiven him for. But instead of showing some leadership and stepping up, Grassley is simply listening to the Kochish voices whispering in his ear.
The chief justice regrets that the American people believe that the court is no different from the political branches of government. But again, and with respect, I think he is concerned with the wrong problem. He would be well served to address the reality, not the perception, that too often there is little difference between the actions of the court and the actions of the political branches.
So, physician heal thyself. He would be well served to address the reality, not the perception, that too often there is little difference between the actions of the Court and the actions of the political branches. So, physician heal thyself.
That's a little like telling the beaten spouse they're sorry he made them beat her, isn't it? The entire rant reads like a man who is under serious pressure to do his job, is refusing to, and instead blames everyone else.
Is this the dying rant of a loser? Could be...