In what can only be called the most significant find of the century, the Democrat Party has finally discovered a 229 year-old document called the United States Constitution.
I know! Who knew they could read?!
I’m going to go out on a limb here and guess that whoever sent out this tweet has never read this, what’s it called? … “Constitution” in his or her entire life. Because if this tweeter had, he or she would know that refusing to confirm a President’s nominee to the Supreme Court is actually “following the Constitution.”
Article II, Section 2, Paragraph 2: “He [the President] shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.”
The US Senate has the Constitutional authority not to give consent.
Don’t be too hard on the Democrats. They just discovered this 229 year-old document exists. They’re bound to be a little ignorant of its content.
You see, my intellectually-challenged friends in the Democrat Party, the Constitution lays out our government in such a way as to prevent a President from becoming an all-powerful Ruler by separating power into different branches. This document which you recently discovered, puts in place what we on Planet Earth call “checks and balances.” The Senate’s involvement in confirming nominees is one such check on a President to ensure that he does not become all powerful. And one such way they did that was by giving the Senate the authority to actually consent or not consent to a Presidential nomination to the Supreme Court. They are not under any obligation to confirm a President’s nominee [see also Robert Bork].
I know. Some of you are wondering why I bother since we all know the Democrats don’t give a tinker’s damn about the Constitution.
If they did, they would have never voted for Obamacare. They would have stopped Obama in his tracks when he repeatedly violated the Separation of Powers by creating law through “Executive Actions” and “Executive Orders.”
I think part of the problem is, the Democrats know the chances of them retaining the White House in 2017 is rapidly fading. Their supposed “come to Jesus moment” over the importance of the Constitution is more than likely rooted in their own terror that a Republican President just might pull the same kind of crap on them that their Dear Leader has been pulling on us for the last eight years.
They needn’t worry. Provided we elect a Constitutional Conservative, we may actually have a President who respects the Separation of Powers and the checks and balances set out in our Constitution.
And trust me. That scares them more than anything else. Because a Constitutional Conservative President would actually set about to undo all of the unconstitutional actions this all-powerful President has committed. And the Democrats can’t stand that thought. It keeps them up at night.
You have to admit, though. It is kinda cute watching these morons flutter around like wet hens pretending to give a crap about the very document that they have, at best, been ignoring, and at worst, undermining for the last hundred years.
If you like the work at Patriot Retort, please consider contributing
Hit the tip jar DONATE button in the side bar. Even a few bucks can make a world of difference!