On Wednesday Senator Dick Durbin, a liberal Illinois Democrat and the 2nd in command among the Democrat leadership, spent some time deriding the GOP and insinuating that they were racists. Durbin was complaining about how long Loretta Lynch, President Obama’s nominee to Attorney General, had been waiting around to be confirmed when he threw a rhetorical grenade at the GOP. While excoriating the GOP for not holding a vote to confirm Lynch sooner (something we’ll talk about), Durbin likened Lynch’s wait for confirmation to being forced to sit on the back of the bus!
The Republican Majority Leader announced this weekend that he was going to hold this nomination of Loretta Lynch until the bill which is pending before the Senate passes, whenever that may be.
Loretta Lynch, the first African-American woman nominated to be attorney general, is asked to sit in the back of the bus when it comes to the Senate calendar. That is unfair. It’s unjust. It is beneath the decorum and dignity of the United States Senate.
No. What is beneath the decorum and dignity of the Senate is having one of its members call the majority of its members racist, solely to score a few political points.
Durbin seems to forget the fact that the majority of the time that Lynch has had to wait for confirmation in the Senate is because the Democrat majority decided to wait on holding a vote. They could have voted to confirm Lynch in November or December… but chose instead to hand the job off to Republicans in the new Congress. The honest truth is that Reid and the Democrats are simply using the Lynch confirmation as a way to distract from the fact that they filibustered a bill to fight human trafficking! (Seriously, how disgusting are the Democrats?)
Senator Tim Scott (R-SC) who just so happens to also be African-American, noticed a bit more irony in Durbin’s attack on the GOP. “It is helpful to have a long memory and to remember that Durbin voted against Condoleezza Rice during the 40th anniversary of the March [on Selma]. So I think in context it’s just offensive that we have folks who are willing to race bait on such an important issue as human trafficking. Sometimes people use race as an issue that is hopefully going to motivate folks for their fight. But what it does, is it infuriates people.”
Senator John McCain was one of those who was infuriated by Durbin’s statements. On Thursday the senior Senator from Arizona took to the Senate floor and delivered a fiery rebuke to Senator Durbin and other Democrats who had tried to make the Lynch issue a racial one.
“What is beneath the decorum of the United States Senate, I would say to the senator from Illinois is for him to come to that floor and use that imagery and suggest racist tactics are being employed to delay Ms. Lynch’s confirmation vote. Such inflammatory rhetoric has no place in this body and serves no purpose other than to further divide us.
Perhaps, my colleagues — and the Senator from Illinois in particular — need to be reminded of their own record when it comes to the treatment of African-American women whose nominations were before this body. In 2012 Janice Rodgers Brown, an African American was nominated to serve on the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, a court that had never included an African-American woman judge. The Senator from Illinois voted to filibuster her nomination in 2003 and again in 2005, when she was finally confirmed after waiting 684 days, the Senator from Illinois voted against the historic nomination.
I would never suggest, even with veiled rhetoric that Judge Rodgers Brown’s race was the reason for the Senator from Illinois’ opposition to her nomination. And I say to my colleague, that he should extend that same courtesy to me and my colleagues.”
Can we be honest here? Racism still exists, no doubt. But it is never the reason that any politician elected to national office in the United States decides to vote one way or the other. It hasn’t been for years, maybe even decades.
The war on women meme and the race card are tired old canards that have no place in civil discourse. We don’t oppose Obama for his race, we oppose him because he’s a terrible President whose liberal ideas, policies and choices have been bad for our country. We don’t oppose Hillary Clinton because she’s a woman, but because she’s a liberal whose ideas, policies and choices have proven to be bad for our country. (Also, I happen to think that she is corrupt and without a moral compass.) We oppose liberal ideas, policies, beliefs, philosophies, etc… because we think they’re bad, not because of the person suggesting them. Liberals need to find a new and better argument for their ideas because the current ad hominem attacks are played out.
The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by EagleRising.com