Is the SDMB an echo chamber?

[Bricker]

@elucidator

So, this Merrick Garland guy, that Obama put forth, he’s totally a raving anarcho-syndicalist Commie that had to be stopped, regardless?

In March of this year, after the President nominated Garland, I said he should be confirmed, and drew flack from the right for it:

@UltraVires

@Bricker

If I were a senator, I would vote to confirm.

Jebus, Bricker. You are one of the board’s resident conservatives, but you have taken many, many non-conservative positions. Why would you confirm a moderate/leftist to replace Scalia?

I understand that the Court is supposed to be above politics, but Obergefell, Kennedy v. Louisiana, Casey, Lawrence, have blown that facade out of the water. We need strict constructionists in these positions or else rule by the people will be no longer: we just submit our proposals to nine lawyers.

And the answer was: because elections have consequences. Garland was not my cup o’ tea, but Obama was entitled to deference in his picks.

But whoever Trump puts forth now, given his depth of legal scholarship, he should be confirmed, because elections have consequences, and the people have spoken?

My principles are unchanged now.