The recently introduced legislation to further enable the 25th Amendment certainly has Republicans in an uproar, although it may all be faux-uproar:
Crazy Nancy Pelosi is looking at the 25th Amendment in order to replace Joe Biden with Kamala Harris. The Dems want that to happen fast because Sleepy Joe is out of it!!!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) October 9, 2020
And it’s not just Trump, as faithful Trump apologist Erick Erickson – yes, Erickson, I know you think you’re an objective observer – also kicks in his echo-opinion in private email to non-subscribers to his newsletter:
That all suggests this is really about making it easier for Kamala Harris to replace Joe Biden if he should win. These are not good optics.
Of course, neither Trump nor Erickson address the deeply uncomfortable fact that Biden has, from all reports, come off as competent, knowledgeable, compassionate, and precise in his speeches and debate performance, with little or no propensity for lying through his teeth, unlike Trump. I wouldn’t expect Trump to have the guts to admit to it, of course, but if Erickson were truly an objective analyst, rather than an apologist who has convinced himself that the lies and other Trumpian deep sins are more acceptable than society, like, changing, you know?, then I’d expect some honest analysis from him.
Instead, we get this:
I realize the Democrats believe the Constitution is a living, breathing document, but I didn’t think they’d decide to perform abortions on it.
And then he goes on to analyze the legislation as if it’s already law. But it’s not, it’s up for debate, improvement, and correction in the Senate, and if the Republicans were a functional Party, I’d expect that we’d get a fairly good piece of legislation out of it through contributions from both Parties. You know, how government used to work, which I will now assure the younger members of my reading audience is how American government worked before the Republicans were invaded by religion.
More importantly, Erickson deliberately chooses to use a trigger word, abortion, a word that the right has been trained to associate with evil, and thus associate this legislation with that same idiotic evil, and then slather legislation deliberately permitted under the Constitution with some really dumb innuendo.
I mean, come on, man. If the Democrats want Harris to succeed Biden soon after the inauguration, if it happens, then all Biden has to do is resign.
Resign.
You don’t need anything fancier than that. And if he doesn’t want to resign and he has his faculties, great. Harris gains highly valuable experience working with the VP of the highly successful Obama Administration.
I mean, why doesn’t Erickson acknowledge these simple facts? He can beat his gums all he wants about Obama, but the numbers speak for themselves in terms of economics, crime, scandal-free government, what-have-you. Obama was far more successful and competent than Trump or Bush. But he can’t acknowledge that, can he?
And that’s because Erickson is frantic to retain his reputation as a conservative pundit. Not as an insightful, independent pundit, but as one of those magisterial conservatives, such as populates National Review: they spew out their regal sounding essays that, in my limited experience, fall apart quickly under examination. With just a hint of Rush Limbaugh’s corrupt, lovely voice. Erickson can’t do that by suggesting that his President is incompetent, either in terms of temperament or even core intelligence. His core audience would leave, and he’d be as audience-less as … well, to be brutally honest, myself.
Such is the result of not adhering to Party kant, eh?
So, instead, we get brainless caterwauling over proposed legislation that pertains to future incompetent Executives. The Dems do the responsible thing and Trump loses his mind, because he’s aware there’s an implied insult in it, and because Trump loses his mind, Erickson has to ape him.
It’s too bad.
