The courts shift, deal with it

Mr. Wackerman: I appreciate being hung out as a serious critic of Donald J. Trump, but would like it even more if you would bother to spell my name correctly! Nevertheless, I don’t understand how anyone can still be fooled by such a con artist, who has done so much damage to the country, someone who knows so little and who understands even less, so completely unqualified for the job the minority, together with foreign adversaries, got him into, someone so childish that he makes a laughingstock of himself internationally by bragging that he could remember 5 simple little words! My goodness, how dumb can anyone be for still supporting such an uneducated, immoral, shallow and utterly selfish and fake clown?

Mr. Wackerman - thanks for pointing out the obvious to us but obviously not to Mr. Oberg. Since you cited our friend “Jorge” be prepared for another “orange man bad” rant. But with each rant, Jorg is letting us know President Trump continues to be a positive influence beyond his first Presidential term.

This is an excellent letter. The Constitution doesn't guarantee equal outcomes for either party - just a fair shot for people to compete in the electoral process. If Democrats don’t like the outcome they can try to amend the Constitution as has been done 33 times in the past.

Mr. Wackerman,

I understand your viewpoint and I know that the pendulum swings both ways. Unfortunately you over simplify the situation and leave out a lot of pertinent facts that detract from your idealistic viewpoint.

You are correct that in most cases liberal presidents will nominate Justices that lean liberal and the conservative presidents will nominate Justices that lean conservative. President Reagan nominated Sandra Day O’Connor, Antonin Scalia and Anthony Kennedy during his term and they were confirmed 99-0, 98-0 and 97-0 respectively. George H.W. Bush nominated David Souter, confirmed 90-9. You indicated that President Clinton nominated two pro-abortion Justices, a hot topic right now, in Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer. They were confirmed 96-3 and 87-9. In case you missed the point of these nominations I will clarify it. You can see by the vote which shows there was almost no opposition to any of them regardless of whether they were nominated by left or right leaning presidents. The Democrats voted for the conservative nominations and vice versa. The reason being is that the Justices were overwhelmingly qualified due to their judicial qualifications not their political positions.

Now I will touch on President Obama’s nominations. Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan were confirmed 68-31 and 63-37, not an overwhelming number but still a reasonable amount of Republicans voted for them. Unfortunately during Obama’s time the radical right managed to take over the traditional GOP and fill many positions with extremists that care little about judicial qualifications. Then the two faced hypocrite, AKA Mitch McConnell, refused to even give the courtesy of a hearing to Obama’s third nominee, Merrick Garland, because with almost a year to go in his term Mitch said it was too short a time and the next president elected should be the one to nominate the Justice. Of course we know that with only a few weeks left in Trump’s term the two faced McConnell then rushed through Amy Comey Barrett to replace RGB saying that while the president is in office he should nominate regardless of the time left in the term.

In your letter you indicated that Trump was able to nominate three to his liking. Aside from the fact that he probably should have been able to nominate only one, maybe two at the most, he really had nothing to do with the nominations other than read them from a sheet of paper. All three of the Justices confirmed were vetted by the Freedom Caucus for the sole purpose of changing the court from judicial based to politically based with extreme right wing views. Their recent rulings indicate they are succeeding.