Before he leaves office, Obama needed to remind us just how un-progressive he can be

I don’t go off on a rant very often, but to all you so called progressives who think Obama’s picking of Merrick Garland for the Supreme Court was a stroke of genius, or are now rallying behind it, please remove your head from out of your ass.

What do you think Barack Obama is trying to do here, teach Republicans a lesson? Make them look like idiots? Make them happy maybe? News flash! Republicans never learn, and they’ve looked like fools for years now. Guess what, aside from Trump, it hasn’t hurt them at all. The third reason must be the answer, right?

Obama doesn’t win here. Period. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has vowed to block any Supreme Court nominee. Why pick the “most conservative nominee by a Dem in the modern era” if no one will get a fair hearing? Why wouldn’t you stay true to the progressive roots you at least campaigned on? McConnell doesn’t look any worse for rejecting a moderate judge than a progressive one, he looks like incompetent turtle regardless.

What happens if McConnell changes his mind? Probably not going to happen, but let’s say for argument’s sake that he does. Hell, let’s even presume that Garland gets the job. Then what?

Liberal Obama’s Supreme Court legacy will be him appointing a judge whose positions are largely unclear. He appears to be at least a little anti-gun and pro voting rights (which every judge should be). But on the larger issues, who knows, and that’s the point.

He’s been fairly pro-corporate, so much so that the Chamber of Commerce and the business community has not protested his nomination. That should have raised a red flag right away. He may not have voted in favor of Citizens United which opened the floodgates of corporate money into our elections, but he certainly won’t vote to reverse it. Garland hasn’t been very open to criminal justice reform either and has been fairly tough on crime in the process.

Then there is abortion, nobody knows where he stands on abortion. Is Obama really trying to teach Republicans a lesson by nominating someone who may one day overturn Roe V. Wade? Why on earth would any Democratic President take that risk? It’s inexcusable.

By choosing Merrick Garland for the Supreme Court, it’s easy to see why progressives in this country have felt betrayed for so long. Instead of thinking of revenge, politics, or both, Obama should be thinking about the fucking country.


  1. You are a Canadian Bernie Sanders shill who was busted posting you own article on FB pretending to be an objective 3rd party Poster. The article’s intent is to support Sanders claim he would ask Obama to remove Justice Garland if Sanders became President. The subtext of Sanders’ comment and your article is President Obama has made a poor choice and Sanders could make a better. Which only another way of saying you both side with our obstructive Senate. I no longer identify myself as a Progressive. Nothing this President does is ever good enough, done right or fast enough for a group of people who as a majority sat out the 2012-2014 elections. It is like their “buyers remorse.” All complaints with little help or support.

    • Busted for what, sharing my article? This article was written before Bernie Sanders even gave his opinion. This article has nothing to do with him… You think by not agreeing with Obama’s pick that I side with Republicans huh? Progressives aren’t supposed to criticize their own, is that it? If you were progressive or liberal to begin with, you’d know that’s a load of crap.

  2. The affordable care act, Obama’s signature piece of legislation, is really a Republican policy. Obamacare is a give away to insurance companies. This nominee is more of the same. The Republican turn hard right and we cave in the name of compromise. In negotiations if you want $20k for you car you ask $25k. Some offers $15k and you compromise at $20k. Democrats start the negotiations at $20k Republicans counter at you give me $20k and I’ll take it off your hands. Dems panic and say just take the car but please don’t charge me. Pathetic! Obama should have nominated the most liberal tree hugging judge he could find then when President Sanders or Clinton takes office and nominates a moderately progressive judge the Senate would gladly take that over the tree hugger.

  3. The Garland nomination is a politically shrewd move that reminds Democrat voters that the fate of SCOTUS is in the hands of the president – and that might include a president Trump / Cruz / Whomever/Whatever. So they should get the f*k out and vote! The nomination may not hurt the Rethugs much, but it doesn’t help them with whatever is left of their “moderate” wing. And some of those voters may well choose to sit on their hands if it means pulling a lever for Trump. It hangs Mr. Garland out to dry, makes him a pawn in the game, but it’s clear he chose to take this opportunity, however slim the odds are in his favor.

Leave a Comment