×

What is the ‘mainstream’

EDITOR:

With the inauguration of Donald Trump, America has been in high gear regarding changes to policies, practices and the promotion of candidates for high-level government jobs. The usual conflict between parties again takes on a fun-filled and festive tone (read w/sarcasm).

A recent TV news program noted in one poll (among the seemingly endless polls of this past political season) 60 percent of respondents stated the selection of Supreme Court justices to be of high concern for their choice of president. Candidate Trump produced a list of possible names, and President Trump has now narrowed the candidates to two, hearings will begin within a few weeks on his final selection.

Even though the Republican Party controls the presidency, House of Representatives and Senate (in which the “nuclear option” for confirmation is now in effect thanks to Sen. Harry Reid), Democrats in the form of Senator Schumer are threatening a variety of blocking maneuvers if the candidate is considered out of the “mainstream”.

Hearing that, I immediately questioned “who decides what constitutes ‘mainstream'”, who defined it and using what criteria? A slap to the forehead brought me back to my senses… why the liberal fringe of course! This idea of “mainstream” is as ephemeral as “climate change”, you can define it any way you wish and denounce anyone who would challenge that thought. Sen Schumer could simply proclaim “mainstream is whatever I say it is… case closed”.

Since “mainstream” is un…or ill defined, lets presume it to mean “status quo.” Currently, the supposedly apolitical Supreme Court has conservative/ liberal/ moderate members in a certain ratio and to keep it mainstream, should not become “loaded”.

This perception of mainstream is subjective and presumes history is static – it’s not. What was mainstream 75 years ago is not mainstream today (witness the changes is society since World War II). Mainstream is fickle and changes with fads and fashions. There is, however, a continuing set of enduring principles which have stood the winds of change for over 200 years, our Constitution.

It is only fitting that President Trump put forth candidates who are originalists and devoted to the constitution as written and amended.

It has seemed odd to me that in the near past the term “conservative” (or “constitutional conservative”) has been seen in a negative context when it (the Constitution) provides us with the means to safeguard the living of a “liberal” life. Political interpretations of these terms should not apply when discussing the makeup or decisions of the Supreme Court.

The criteria for selection and appointment to the Supreme Court must be devotion to the constitution, our enduring “mainstream.”

Michael A. Glass

Nahma

NEWSLETTER

Today's breaking news and more in your inbox

I'm interested in (please check all that apply)
Are you a paying subscriber to the newspaper? *
   

Starting at $4.62/week.

Subscribe Today