Select Page

If Democrats attack Barrett’s religions … they may suffer the wrath of God

If Democrats attack Barrett’s religions … they may suffer the wrath of God

Democrat leaders are a pragmatic bunch.  They know as well as anyone that their chance of stopping the confirmation of Judge Amy Coney Barrett as the new ninth Associate Justice on the Supreme Court is less than winning the lottery.  Even the fact that President Trump and a couple members of the Judiciary Committee have come down with Covid-19 does not change the equation.  Congress has been holding virtual hearings for months.

Senate Democrats have two problems.  First is the fact that they are powerless to stop it.  They do not have the control of the Senate – and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell appears to have more than enough votes to win confirmation.  It is game, set, match.

Secondly, Barrett is going to be a virtually impossible nominee to slander and demonize.  In a world composed of imperfect people, Barrett comes close to the human ideal.  She has the intellect, the integrity and the moral authority that is virtually unassailable.  She is the mother of seven interracial children – one with Downs Syndrome.  She has the admiration of all that know her – regardless of political differences.  At this point, it is almost inconceivable that there is anything salacious in her past.  She is the Mother Theresa of the judiciary.

It is going to be exceedingly difficult – and politically perilous – for Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee to attack her without suffering a backlash.  Attacking her Catholic faith vis-à-vis the issue of abortion seems to be their only religion-based objection, and that could produce a double whammy for Democrats.

Attacking religion in a nation where more than 80 percent of the people are acolytes of a religion of one manner or another is a dangerous strategy.  And the percentage of people of faith who are voters is even higher.

More specifically, attacking felicity to one of America’s most popular religions, in and of itself, is problematic.  It would be an attack on the 51 million members of the Catholic Church in America – not counting other Christian,  Jewish and Muslim religious groups that oppose abortion.

Judging her based on religion would also cast unfavorable attention on the major Catholic Democrat leaders who support and advance abortion-on-demand.  People like Nancy Pelosi and Joe Biden often refer to their faith as a fact of character.  It is a reccurring theme in the Biden campaign.  In fact, they are dubious Catholics at best – and by the strictest standards are automatically excommunicated Catholics.  You may recall how the Catholic Church banned then Democrat Presidential candidate John Kerry from receiving the holy sacrament of communion.

Hmmm.  I wonder whether Pelosi and Biden attend Mass regularly and receive communion.  You see how attacking Barrett already has me wondering about Pelosi and Biden – and by extension, every Democrat politician who claims the impossible posture of being both a good Catholic and enabler of abortions.

In the holy spirit of transparency, I feel obligated to put myself on the record.  I was raised Catholic and I am pro-life.  But it is not the Catholic Church that informs me about abortion. In fact, I often tell friends that I would have to improve a LOT to rise to the level of bad Catholic.  I left the Church of Roman right after college.  I flirted with Episcopalianism (married twice in that Church) but have spent most of my adult life as a spiritual-based person with no connection to organized religion.  I am a secular pro-lifer.

The only potential benefit Democrats can gain from the nomination and confirmation of Barrett is to attempt to get the Party base – and recruit other voters – to see the quick confirmation of Barrett as a reason to vote against Trump.  And even that is a double-edged sword.

They can play the hypocrisy card on election year confirmations – and they are doing just that.  But the critics have been just as hypocritical.  History reveals the real rule.  When one party holds both the White House and the Senate, they confirm justices.  When there is a difference in party between the White House and the Senate, they do not.

Democrats are fond of saying that the Barrett confirmation would be the second time Republicans have stolen a Supreme Court seat.   Such nonsense.  The Barrett confirmation – if it succeeds – will be perfectly legal and constitutional.

Democrats say it is not about Barrett’s religion and then express pre-hearing opposition based on nothing but her religion.  It they try to character assassinate Barrett as they did Justice Brett Kavanaugh, Democrats are more likely to build public support for the Indiana judge’s confirmation.

So, there ‘tis.

 

 

About The Author

Larry Horist

So,there‘tis… The opinions, perspectives and analyses of Larry Horist Larry Horist is a businessman, conservative writer and political strategist with an extensive background in economics and public policy. Clients of his consulting firm have included such conservative icons as Steve Forbes and Milton Friedman. He has served as a consultant to the Nixon White House and travelled the country as a spokesman for President Reagan’s economic reforms. He has testified as an expert witness before numerous legislative bodies, including the U. S. Congress. Horist has lectured and taught courses at numerous colleges and universities, including Harvard, Northwestern, DePaul universities, Hope College and his alma mater, Knox College. He has been a guest on hundreds of public affairs talk shows, and hosted his own program, “Chicago In Sight,” on WIND radio. Horist was a one-time candidate for mayor of Chicago and served as Executive Director of the City Club of Chicago, where he led a successful two-year campaign to save the historic Chicago Theatre from the wrecking ball. An award-winning debater, his insightful and sometimes controversial commentaries appear frequently on the editorial pages of newspapers across the nation. He is praised by readers for his style, substance and sense of humor. According to one reader, Horist is the “new Charles Krauthammer.” He is actively semi-retired in Boca Raton, Florida where he devotes his time to writing. So, there ‘tis is Horist’s signature sign off.

4 Comments

  1. Richard

    Great commentary as usual, Larry. As a lifelong Catholic, it astounds me how many Catholics vote for Dems, seeing that the #1 issue to the Church by far is sanctity of life. That is truly a hypocricy that I have a very hard time understanding. Yes, the Church is typically pro-immigration and tends to lean liberal on social justice initiatives, but there is no downplaying their anti-abortion stance.

    Reply
  2. Florida Phil

    I grew up a Conservative secularist in a very heavy liberal, Catholic and unionist area. When younger, abortion was an issue, but not so much for me. With age – just a few years younger than you, Larry – I’ve grown to abhor the thought of abortion based on the cruelty of it and the pain it causes to both the fetus and others surrounding the parents. Moving the allowable cutoff date further out – even to post-birth – means that the idea of “my body, my choice” is false. There are others like me who support the appointment of Barrett based on her education, experience and judicial deportment – just about the only three things that should be considered for such an appointment, not potential upcoming cases.

    Reply
  3. DB

    As am independent, neither red or blue, I have a unique view of a problem and try to think of a logical answer. I have also tried to follow the direction the Democratic Party is heading and cannot for the life of me see a direction except it is the party of hate and hostility, and it gets worse when they don’t get their own way, almost like school yard bullies. For the last 3 years ever since their pre-crowned queen was denied the throne, we have had to endure end after endless investigations and told they had the smoking guns about this or that all the way up through a failed impeachment. It has come to light that there was NO smoking gun, it was a false narrative put out by the dishonest Hillary Clinton and Democratic Party to contract for a false narrative that the Duly elected President Trump had colluded with the Russians in a phone call. OMG! What did this cost us tax payers to do over the three years it went on? What if the bill were sent to the Democratic Party for their waster of Government funds instead? The continued almost hourly harassment that President Trump has had to endure these past 4 years at the hands of Pelosi, HRC, Nader, Schumer, and even the past President and his wife, is unbelievable. To me if it is not it sure is crowding the Sedition definition as they a have attempted to unseat Trump. Why are they doing this, because he is not part of the Washington DC political crowd of back slamming or knife sticking bureaucrats who have been giving the shaft to the American Tax Payers for decades and he has promised to end that with draining the swamp. After a pretty successful first term, and filling most of his promises, and if reelected he may very well find that swamp plug and pull it. As an independent I would love to see all the swamp critters on both sides slide down the drain and replace them with people who care about American and its citizens more than their accumulated wealth.

    Reply
  4. Winona M Kleckley

    There’s no question they will attack her Religion! They will do anything to win including packing the courts!

    Reply

Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published.

Follow Us