Editor,
Regarding Gordon Weil’s last column, Mr. Weil, how did you feel back in 2009-2010 when Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid exercised his power exactly the same way the current Majority Leader Mitch McConnell does now? To quote a certain former Commander-in-Chief: “Elections have consequences.”
You neglected to mention that when Senator McConnell refused to consider the Garland nomination, he was merely invoking the “Biden rule.” (Lame duck presidents don’t nominate SCOTUS candidates during their final year in office). Liberals hate it when they are skewered by their own policies. (Another example: “the nuclear option” which resulted in the confirmation of Justices Gorsuch and Kavanaugh.)
Bipartisanship is impossible in the current political climate. Two years after the 2016 election, the Democrats continue their attempts to oust the elected president with absolutely no evidence of high crimes or misdemeanors. The Constitution and Bill of Rights are dismissed as outdated documents by the Left which is moving towards Socialism at the speed of light. How could there possibly be any bipartisanship when one side has lost their collective mind!
The last time bipartisanship actually occurred in Congress was during the 1990s. President Clinton and the Republican Congress were able to move legislation forward because they shared many values and goals. However, since the election of George Bush (43) in 2000, the Democrats have lost all semblance of sanity and have abandoned reasonable policy positions they supported as recently as 2015! (E.G. illegal immigration, border security, Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, etc.)
Today when Democrats call for “bipartisanship” or “compromise” what really mean is “capitulate” and “surrender.” Agree with us or else.
No thanks, Mr. Weil. I’ll continue to support Mitch McConnell (and Susan Collins, too).
Paul Israelson
Biddeford
Comments are not available on this story. Read more about why we allow commenting on some stories and not on others.
We believe it's important to offer commenting on certain stories as a benefit to our readers. At its best, our comments sections can be a productive platform for readers to engage with our journalism, offer thoughts on coverage and issues, and drive conversation in a respectful, solutions-based way. It's a form of open discourse that can be useful to our community, public officials, journalists and others.
We do not enable comments on everything — exceptions include most crime stories, and coverage involving personal tragedy or sensitive issues that invite personal attacks instead of thoughtful discussion.
You can read more here about our commenting policy and terms of use. More information is also found on our FAQs.
Show less