Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
We Have a Politically Savvy Senator
Unfortunately, it is newly elected Senator Kyrsten Sinema (D-AZ). She just got herself harshly denounced by NARAL for announcing her support for a fellow Arizonan nominated by President Trump to a Federal judgeship. NARAL is upset because nominee Michael Liburdi served for five years as chairman of the Arizona Right to Life PAC:
Sinema said she has known Liburdi for years, and during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing praised him as someone who will be a fair-minded judge.
“Mike and I do not share all the same political beliefs, but I believe the role of the Senate is to evaluate every nominee based on whether he or she is professionally qualified … and can be trusted to faithfully interpret and uphold the law,” Sinema said.
This is after Sinema came under criticism for standing to applaud Trump at his State of the Union because of his support for “right to try” legislation.
She’s also made a couple of early votes not aligned with the Democrats, has been circumspect in her public statements and, unlike most of her colleagues, does not denounce Trump every day.
Sinema ran a very temperate, moderate, and competent campaign (in contrast to the incompetent McSally) and she seems to be following the same template post-election. Usually, Democratic senators elected in swing states vote liberal for four years and then only build a “moderate” record as they prepare to launch their reelection campaign. Sinema seems to be thinking about her reelection from the start. I am sure she will mostly vote with the Progressives but her strategy seems to be to avoid verbal excess, pick a few higher-profile spots where she can dissent from Progressive orthodoxy, and build a reputation as an independent — a brand appealing to Arizonans.
Published in General
Sinema is going to be more inersting to watch than AOC. I watch AOC for comic relief, but Sinema doesn’t seem to fall in lockstep with the rest of the Dems in DC – at least not yet . . .
I’ll give credit where credit is due. Her statement on her reasons for supporting Mike Liburdi is a good one. The criticism that came her way from the usual suspects will not hurt her too much in Arizona.
More proof of Sistema’s savvy approach. Today she was one of just 3 Democrats to support William Barr’s nomination as AG.
Sinema will split from the party when to do so is not critically necessary, however she will likely be there for Chuck when he really needs her. She is a smart politician. She was one of the half-dozen most conservative Democrats in the House of Representatives. It will be very hard to ever get rid of her.
These are the dangerous ones. Physically attractive, smart, calculating, and, ultimately, committed to leftist causes. She’s going to bamboozle a lot of wide-eyed innocents when it comes to our domestic enemy on the Left.
Is she one of the people for whom you voted just to diss Mr Trump, or was that wonderfully effective tactic limited to Representatives?
I suppose it is too much to hope that she really is independent.
She’s not. I doubt she would dissent on any major progressive issue if she were the deciding vote, but she is savvy and if she continues like this would be tough to beat.
Overall sounds like an improvement over McCain.
I voted for Republican Martha McSally over Sinema. However, if EverTrumpers Kelli Ward or Joe Arpaio had been nominated, I would have voted for Sinema.
The effort in the House of Representatives worked. Instead of a supplicant House of Representatives, there is now an institutional check on Trump, given that the Republican Senate was not doing its job to be a co-equal branch. (See Mitch McConnell agreeing to the “emergency declaration” for a wall after Congress would not vote for it.)
McCain would have stood up to Trump on his “emergency declaration.”
We finally have a president who’s willing to protect American sovereignty — one of the few legitimate roles of the federal government — and everyone is knuckle-biting over it. For heaven’s sake!
You don’t stand up for American sovereignty by violating the American constitution; you diminish American sovereignty by violating the American constitution. And if you ignore the consyitionally created Courts, you will be removed in accordance with that constitution. No person is above the law or the constitution.
The president has emergency powers. There are lots of previous presidential emergency declarations still in place (28 according to CNN). Protecting our border from invading hordes is absolutely a constitutional duty of the president! It’s just that previous presidents have failed to uphold their oath to the Constitution in this regard, and because Orange Man Bad, and “this just isn’t done in polite (submissive) company,” suddenly protecting our national sovereignty is controversial.
The extent of the leftist contagion is such that even Republicans won’t protect our national sovereignty. Pheh.
I believe that remains to be seen. I see a lot of ignored criminality/unconstitutionality out there and it’s not Trump.
Oh, yeah! I meant to list the Democrats who have proven to be above the law, starting with the 2016 Democrat nominee for president, Hillary Rotten Clinton. I think we could turn this into a ditty like the 50-states song: Clinton, Clapper, Comey, Brennan, McCabe, Lerner, Menendez, Strzok, Page,…
Since, once again you have turned a post that was not about Trump into a post about Trump, I have three words for you on constitutionality – stop being silly.
Whether it is a wise move by Trump is a different question but there is simply not a constitutional question about his declaration. There is a statutory interpretation question about whether this is an emergency under the statute (I think Trump has the better of the argument here) and, if it is an emergency, does the president have the authority to order construction of the wall under Section 2808 (I think this is an open question). Trump has given no indication he is going to ignore the courts, and if you look at his practice over the past two years you’ll see, that despite the hysteria generated by Progressives and Never Trumpers, he has not done so.