'Civility' during confirmation process? Don't be fooled Exclusive: Erik Rush asserts, 'Socialists in our government have been playing a very long game'

With Ginsburg's death, and as we draw closer to the general election, however, we're beginning to see some of the less toxic – but decidedly anti-Trump – Democrats and Republicans call for civility in general and throughout the nomination process in particular. While many moderate Republicans (read "RINO") continue to evidence their true colors, others who've come under fire over their equivocation and grudging support for President Trump are now stating that they'll support moving ahead with Trump's nominee.

Such actions are also born of fear and desperation. These people are well-aware that their antics over the last four years have driven voters to Trump, rather than away from him, and their actions at present are a feeble attempt at damage control.

The takeaway here is that we should not be fooled. Socialists in our government have been playing a very long game, and all we need do is look to our large, Democrat-controlled cities to see the depth of their villainy. Suffice it to say that any entreaties toward civility and the rule of law on their part are no more than dangerous diversions.

Let me show you something I saw this morning, posted by my uber-liberal sister. THIS is what we’re up against.
************************

Here’s something I saw on Facebook. I’m sending it to my senators.

1. Refuse to engage with the nominee. Don’t meet with the nominee. Go on every news show and say that while the President has the right to nominate, the Senate has the right to withhold its consent.

2. Belittle the process, and demean them demanding that we play along. When pressed on why no Democrats will give the nominee the “courtesy” of a meeting. say that “We’re just following the precedent set by Leader McConnell for Merrick Garland” Also point out “We represent more Americans than you do, but since y’all don’t need us for your vote, and you don’t care what the majority of Americans we represent actually want, then run along and have your little vote and your little victory party with your little friends, but don’t expect us to play along.” Practice your Southern euphemisms until you can say them with the utmost of sincerity: “How many conformation votes did Ruthie get again? 96 votes? Well I think it’s just precious that [Nominee] will get 51 votes. A proud moment for her, I’m sure.” And “I’m sure [nominee] truly believes her views are mainstream, bless her heart.”

3. Keep highlighting the outcomes of a conservative majority, but keep it simple. At the Judiciary Committee hearing, ask pointed yes-or-no questions about the real world impacts of a conservative court: Do you believe in a woman’s fundamental right to control medical decisions for her body, including abortion? Do you believe that insurance companies should be able to exclude health coverage based on preexisting conditions? Do you believe that employers should be able to discriminate against LGBTQ+ people because of their sexuality? Do you believe that states should restrict voting for economic reasons? For racial reasons? Do you believe that immigrants seeking asylum should be separated from their children? Make sure to phrase the question so that it states the preferred conservative outcome (even if they would prefer not to say it out loud). Maybe ask a few incendiary questions: Do you believe black and brown people are inferior to white people? Do you believe that women should be subordinate to men? Do you believe that some Americans deserve more rights than others?

4. For God’s sake, don’t grandstand. Don’t explain. Don’t deliver windy wordy closing arguments. The Republicans aren’t listening and they’ll just accuse of you grandstanding anyway. Instead, just keep asking yes or no questions, and every time the nominee tries to explain or evade, repeat the question as though she is a recalcitrant child. “I’m sorry, Ms. Nominee, but you didn’t answer my question. Let’s try it again, shall we?” If the nominee ducks on the grounds that the issue might come before the court, say, “Yes. It’s not a question of might. It will. And that is precisely why we would like to know what you believe before we give you life tenure on a body whose opinions are not subject to review.” Remind the nominee that this is not a panel discusion or colloquium at a judicial conference, this is a JOB interview.

5. Refuse to engage with Republicans on any substance or process. When it comes time for the committee to vote, vote “Present” instead of “No”. When the vote comes to the Floor, do the same. This makes clear you are objecting to the process having been hijacked rather than engaging with the nominee or her qualifications. Let the talking point be “Democrats decline to participate in the GOP’s hypocrisy and double standards. We are prepared to vote today on jobs and support for individuals and small business affected by the pandemic. We are prepared to vote on disaster relief for Hurricane, derecho and wildfire damage. We are ready to vote on making the ACA even better. We are ready to vote on the over two hundred bills that the House has sent to the Senate. We will vote on any of these bills but we will not participate in this shameless double standard being foisted on us by a party that lies to the American people without any compunction.”

The eschatological difference between Hegelian-Marxist-Leninist leftists and Judeo-Christian conservatives informs how both sides deal with political issues such as this.

The leftists believe that the world will eventually and inevitably become a global communist paradise, but that if they push hard enough it can come sooner, so they constantly push and push and push and push. Moreover, there is no price not worth paying to make the revolution happen and the paradise come sooner.

The conservatives believe that the world will eventually and inevitably be transformed into a post-global God-based paradise, but it will not happen until the time that God chooses to make it happen by sending the Messiah (whom Christians believe is Jesus, but that is a separate issue). So the work of Judeo-Christians is not to ensure the post-apcoalyptic paradise (what Christians call the Millenium), but to do what it takes to bring as many as possible into that paradise. This work continues under politically free nations and politically totalitarian nations alike, so while we would prefer freedom, we are not deterred by tyrants, from Nero to Xi.

Conservatives see temporal success during times when God calls people to attack tyrants head-on, from Moses with Pharaoh and Jehu with Jezebel, to Washington with George III, to Reagan with Gorbachev and Netanyahu with Arafat. That isn’t something God does on a continuous basis, so there are times when the totalitarians temporarily triumph, and life becomes massive suffering.

The corruption found in the left doesn’t affect the left because it is not a reflection of weakness as far as they are concerned, since for them the issue is always the revolution. The corruption found among deep-state conservatives gutted the power of conservatives, since for us the issue is bringing people to freedom, whether political or divine. That is why the present task of our side should be to rid ourselves of corruption (”drain the swamp”), while keeping the left at bay as long as possible. Getting an immediate conservative replacement for RBG is a necessity in this regard.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.