It was gratifying to read an article by the New York Times that lambasted the Hollywood elite. And it appeared on the front page of the paper! In the piece the Times implied that actors and movie executives are rich, self-aggrandizing and white. I would add that they eschew other types of diversity, could care less about income equality and have absolutely no humility.

Every year Americans are subjected to endless award programs where the beautiful people walk on red carpets in expensive designer clothing while the media and entertainment groupies drool all over them. No industry loves giving its members more awards than the movie business.

What sickens some Americans is that so many young people waste their lives away trying to make it in the business, while so few succeed. Is there any industry that hoses its interns worse than Hollywood? Talk about income inequality, compare the millions paid to actors to the interns who pamper them and are abused by them. Hollywood is the only industry where it’s an honor to serve spoiled, immoral and moronic actors, actresses and divas, who expect you to do if for free.

Many people enjoy watching the beautiful women in their gowns designed by Chanel, Herrera and Dior sashaying across the red carpet and up to the stage to have to have their butts kissed by sycophants. But I’ve had enough.

On Oscar night I couldn’t stand it any longer and turned the TV to another channel. In the morning I learned that La La Land was declared best picture by Faye Dunaway and Warren Beatty, and it was an error. How difficult is it for these geniuses to report results correctly?

When you think about it actors don’t have to be rocket scientists to read lines and emote. Their compensation far exceeds the skills necessary to perform. Yet the public idolizes Hollywood celebrities. You might respond by saying that athletes are in the same boat, and I would agree. But at least athletes do something physical that justifies their worth. Actors merely memorize lines and look gorgeous.

But what drives average folks crazy is the gall of Hollywood types that suggest they know the first thing about politics. If this group would steer clear of making idiotic statements about our government, I would be happy. They fail to recognize that they have no influence over other Americans because they’re only interested in going to parties and hooking up with scores of other people just like themselves. I would be shocked if any of the Hollywood types even read the first section of the newspaper.

Frankly I don’t give a damn what Meryl Streep, Viola Davis, Whoopi Goldberg or George Clooney have to say about the federal government or Donald Trump or any political issue. Someone should ask these people why Obamacare should not be amended. The responses would be a real hoot.

In the final days of the 2016 presidential election Beyonce, Jay Z, Bon Jovi, Chance the Rapper, Bruce Springsteen and many other celebrities tried to help Hilary Clinton. How did that work out? Nobody cared about what they had to say.

Hollywood performers should just cash their outsized pay checks, look great, collect awards and keep their stupid opinions to themselves. Note: I stipulate that actors and all Americans have a constitutional right to say anything they please. But everybody else has a constitutional right to ignore them.

There was no shortage of bizarre stories in the news this week. Here are my choices:

-The Trump administration rescinded the Obama bathroom mandate. This is a front page story in the New York Times, believe it or not. Political correctness has been advancing in leaps and bounds in recent years, and liberals and conservatives are always looking for new issues to fight about. Why not bathrooms?

The issue is that people who have physical characteristics of one sex might want the right to use the other sex’s bathrooms if they so choose. It’s a little confusing , I know. Personally I’m not opposed to the rights and needs of any special groups. What I find interesting is that so many are willing to give up the privacy that is afforded both men and women when bathrooms are separated by sex. Frankly most women don’t even want to share bathrooms with their spouses. Why would they be amenable to using a bathroom with strange men?

I have a possible compromise. Bathrooms should be constructed with only stalls and no urinals. Since most bathrooms in our homes have no urinals, it wouldn’t be an imposition for men.

There is the issue of proper etiquette. The proposal will not work unless men agree to lift the seat when they urinate and lower it when they are finished.

After this plan is executed maybe we’ll be able to return to more pressing issues facing the country like the economy, nuclear proliferation, ISIS and immigration reform.

–Wedding restrictions in India. India has its share of destitute citizens. Some legislators think it’s outrageous that affluent families have opulent weddings that cost in the hundreds of thousand of dollars.

Under new regulations in two areas of the country, the government is limiting the headcount at weddings to 400 to 500 attendees, and only 14 dishes (7 vegetarian and 7 non-vegetarian). Another restriction being considered is capping wedding expenses to $7,500.

–Turkish women in the military may now wear head scarves. For years Turkey has lauded that it has a vibrant secular bias even while most citizens are Muslims. For this reason the military banned the use of scarves. This restriction has been abolished giving women the opportunity to dress more modestly as a sign of their faith.

–Millions face famine. The United Nations has announced that 20 million people are on the brink of famine in the world and 1.4 million children are at imminent risk of death. The populations of Nigeria, Somalia, Yemen and South Sudan are in great peril.

The reasons for this problem are twofold. The U.N. needs $5.6 billion to address needs, most of it by the end of March. And the four countries mentioned are “reeling” from conflict. In some places it’s too dangerous to bring aid.

–Russia is responding to “fake” news. The government has established a web site that calls out “fake” news that is disparaging towards Russia. It’s ironic that a country famous for deception, cyber terrorism and election interference is so sensitive about what others are saying.

One of the most important criticisms of the president is that he marginalizes Muslims and other groups. Trump supporters say he’s merely reacting to threats that pose a danger to the safety and well-being of Americans.

Violent Muslims are the most obvious targets of the Trump administration. But his hostility towards them isn’t race-related. Rather he senses significant risk to our society if the vetting of immigrants from this group falls short. Keep in mind Arab countries that have been singled out are in extreme turmoil. In fact the characterization that he is directing his efforts at all Muslims is patently untrue. If he were conducting a war against Islam Trump would have included all Muslims in his ban.

We should not reduce our vigilance because the country hasn’t experienced an epic attack in several years. Serious incidents are occurring throughout the world where the targets are more vulnerable than in the U.S. God forbid America would have to live through another 9/11. If it did the country would surely rally around a president who was much more aggressive than Trump.

Our Constitution and presidential prerogatives clearly indicate that the commander-in-chief has the duty to keep us secure. And the president has the power to close or restrict borders to protect us against those that would inflict harm. President Trump believes the seven countries affected by his restrictions are a clear and present danger to America. Any reasonable president would deem his “temporary actions” to be in the best interests of the country.

Extreme vetting is now the rallying cry. Liberals say that the current two-year waiting periods enable immigration officers to effectively assess Arab immigrants. This may be true for those countries that have the infrastructure to monitor their troublemakers. But in the countries named, this is not the case. Their governments are under attack by rebels and their systems of tracking criminals should give us no comfort.

Other accusations of marginalization against Trump are accurate. In particular he believes that some members of Congress and most of the press want to overturn his presidency.

Democrats attempt to justify their venom and totally un-American attitude by saying that Republicans acted similarly when Obama was president. True, Republicans wanted to unseat Obama, but they were focused on future elections. Conservatives were not marching in the streets and inciting violence.

The vitriol and spiteful disrespect exhibited by Democratic leaders is shameful and in the long run will damage their political party. The opposition has ample legitimate means to stymie Trump’s agenda if they feel it’s not in the best interest of the country. They include public debate on the floors of both houses of Congress and on a plethora of cable news networks. The focus of Democrats should be on the 2018 elections where they will have an opportunity to regain power they lost in 2016. Increased representation is the most effective way to make changes in government. No laws will be enacted during rioting.

The vast majority of the press is anti-Trump. This is not surprising nor unexpected. But certain news outlets have taken this to a new extreme. For one thing many have broken sacred rules of journalism in their zeal to harm the Trump presidency. Average Americans are acknowledging the lies and spin of reporters in public polls. They think the press is less trustworthy than Trump.

Another despicable trend is the tendency to publish stories harmful to Trump without proper vetting. Reporters want to be the first to break a story that damages the Trump administration. When it’s time to retract errors, which have been frequent, it appears in the bowels of the newspaper. And retractions based on misinformation receive little analysis by other news sources. Negative stories, on the other hand, lead the news cycles.

One thing that has received little attention is that the media in general is encouraging leaks in our government in an effort to disrupt the Trump administration. I’m not referring to those who wish to report crimes or inappropriate behavior (whistle-blowers) There has been significant breaches of security at the highest levels of government. In several situations these leaks have been felonious and punishable with prison sentences. The press should not be stoking this activity.

Finally it’s an understatement to say that Trump has thin skin. He won a primary and an election by counter-punching critics using social media. At times his tone is not presidential. But it’s folly to expect the president to change his methods. He will point out untruths by others and will attack them viciously. It’s not ideal, but it’s not illegal.

[Thank’s T. for the inspiration.]

My letter to the New York Times about the conflict between Israel and Palestine was published today. It appears below.

To the Editor:

Re “Inching Toward a One-State Solution?” (editorial, Feb. 16):

In your zeal to be critical of the Trump administration, you seem to assume that the United States now favors a one-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. But President Trump said, “So, I’m looking at two-state and one-state, and I like the one that both parties like.”

How have you concluded anything other than that the United States intends to be open-minded?

You also indicate that a two-state solution has been “America’s Mideast policy for more than 20 years and remains the only just answer to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.” How has this policy benefited anyone during the last two decades?

Time after time, the parties could not agree. Perhaps it’s time to consider all options along with creativity and old-fashioned deal-making skill.

Further, President Trump suggested publicly that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu should suspend new settlements in disputed areas. This is one of the most unsettling issues for Palestinians. Mr. Netanyahu didn’t accede to the suggestion, but he heard it loud and clear, as the whole world did.

SALVATORE J. BOMMARITO

New York

 

Accusations and bad feeling are proliferating Washington. The Trump administration has made some bonehead moves in its haste to make a quick start. At the same time the opposition is going all-in with a strategy to destroy the presidency at every turn.

Trump haters really hate the president’s tweets. They fail to recognize two important factors. One, the new president has used social media to connect with America since the beginning of his presidential campaign with great success. He’s controlled the flow of information and news cycles with his  messages to his base, the press and his enemies. Trump is not going to change a successful tactic given everything that has happened to date.

Two, the Trump administration is very transparent, something that Americans and the press have demanded more of in recent years. If the president thinks of something that he wants to accomplish, he tweets the world. One can argue whether some of his communications are premature, poorly written or not specific (there is a word limit remember), but unlike the last administration, America is well informed.

In a rush to fulfill his promises the president is putting a great strain on his aides. This sometimes results in missteps. For instance General Flynn’s communication with Russian diplomats was likely an attempt to pave and jump start an avenue towards better relations between America and Russia. Maybe they were premature, and maybe they would never bear fruit. But Trump is trying to relate to Putin. This might be a pipe dream, but it’s worth the effort.

However, there was no excuse for Flynn to lie, withhold information or to mislead the president and his aides. Flynn had to go.

Democrats are dead set on destroying Trump. They despise everything about him. After all he’s responsible for their horrific performance in the 2016 elections. A neophyte with no political experience made Hillary Clinton, all of her celebrity supporters, liberal lawmakers and the press look like idiots. His only offense was that he won.

Regardless of one’s political affiliation it makes no sense for Americans to attack the presidency. Trump is going to make policies and take actions that could affect our country for decades. It would be more sensible to work with the president.

Trump’s demeanor and swagger turn off many Americans. This is no reason to denigrate his policies. Fact is that many are still in favor of his agenda. It’s the reason why he won the election. Fixing problems and draining the political swamp will ruffle a lot of feathers. But it needs to be done.

Trump thinks big, and he refuses to allow naysayers to stifle his plans. Unfortunately his opponents portray every initiative in the most negative manner. In fact they often lie and twist the truth to be destructive.

Immigration is a great example. Trump wants a respite of 90 days to ensure that every person coming to America is not intent on making trouble. This is a sensible objective. Obviously no American wants terrorists or felons to immigrate to our country. Why not review the vetting process and be sure? We only hear accusations of bigotry and xenophobia from the left.

Fact is the countries that were included in the temporary ban are in turmoil. The information that can be accumulated on their citizens is insufficient to determine whether one is a troublemaker or a killer. When a Syrian comes to this country, are we sure we have enough background on the person to grant his admission? Often we hear about a two-year vetting process. That may be, but what do we learn about a person from Yemen during this time?

The liberal press and violent protestors are despicable. They are not doing America a service when they disrupt and mislead average Americans. And frankly their activities are so off-the-wall and obvious that Trump’s base is strengthening every day.

Liberal lawmakers who are making the confirmation process so difficult are delaying the employment of hundreds of bureaucrats needed to effectively operate the government. We only discuss cabinet positions, but there are scores of other appointees that need to be hired.

Trump’s progress has been a bit shaky and uneven, but it’s not all his fault. There are many Americans busy at work unfairly smearing his presidency. I thing this is shameful.

Trump has not proven he will be a great president and too many are making it difficult for him to do so.

 

It’s time to consider the status of the Democratic Party in America and recommend changes before their leaders make the party irrelevant.

Currently Democrats are spending their time opposing every Trump agenda item and all of his cabinet nominees. They aren’t providing constructive legislative ideas to improve America. Rather they are encouraging protest by minorities, women’s groups and ultra liberal Americans across the country. Their strategy is creating long-term issues that will result in more political losses in future elections.

Led by Senators Schumer, Warren and Sanders, the party is playing to the most radical elements of their political base. I doubt they have converted one Republican voter to their side. Yet I’m sure moderate Democrats are becoming more disgusted by all the carping and negativity of their leaders.

Epic miscalculations, bad judgment, faulty polling and ineffective campaigning by Democrats resulted in a Republican landslide at every level of government in 2016. Former senator Harry Reid was so intent on sticking it to his opponents that he changed the Senate rules regarding cabinet confirmations from 60 to a simple majority. For this reason Trump is likely to get every one of this nominees confirmed. All the Senate Democrats can do is delay and make vicious attacks on some very good individuals.

The confirmation of Justice Gorsuch to the Supreme Court is probably going to come to fruition even though he needs a few Democratic senators to vote for him (eight). Trump is going to pressure Democrats from states he carried in the election to support Gorsuch. These lawmakers will have to decide whether to stay on the Democratic bandwagon to oblivion or vote to confirm to have a chance of reelection. Gorsuch’s confirmation will re-institute a slight edge of conservatives over liberals on the highest court. The big test will occur if a liberal judge retires during Trump’s tenure.

Democrats have a long climb out of purgatory. They must encourage new blood in the party and present good ideas that Republicans can support to gain back credibility. The old liberal claptrap is no longer effective. They must embrace and not resist the Republican political tsunami.

Democratic presidential candidates included an Obama supported has-been (Hillary Clinton) and a socialist (Sanders). Both eschew capitalism, exceptionalism and change. Every American wants to earn more money and have a shot at the brass ring. Although many millennials are skeptical about our economic system, education and hard work are still the keys to success and prosperity.

Whether you like him personally or not, Donald Trump is changing the country just as he promised. There have been few surprises although many believe his cabinet choices are terrific with a few exceptions. He refuses to be delayed by Democratic whiners or the Republican establishment. If he is able to check off items on his to-do list he will be unstoppable in 2020. Having an obnoxious president is better than having a likeable ideolog who can’t govern the country effectively.

Democrats better begin to offer some fresh ideas soon. America is going to improve under Trump with or without support from the opposition. If Democrats stay on the sidelines and cast stones they will fall further behind in the next off-year elections. This will result in one-party rule for all intents and purposes and be bad for our country.

There is no reason for Trump to change his operating methods. He’s going to call out offenders if they export jobs, cheat the government or are not cooperative. His social media capabilities are epic. We all know what he’s thinking every day. Let’s call this transparency, something that was nonexistent just a few months ago.

I want Trump to protect my family and my country. I want him to lower taxes and cut out government waste. I want him to create more jobs and decrease welfare. I want him to end illegal immigration. I want him to improve our schools. I want him to elevate America’s reputation internationally. If he does these things I will excuse his self-aggrandizement and gruff personality. You should too.

 

Not much has changed since the last edition of Bizarre News. There’s a lot of interesting and weird stuff going on, most of which is carrying the president’s imprint.

-Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) thinks she has a 007 license to verbally assault anyone who is to her right (which is about 99% of America). Her Republican colleagues in the Senate shut her down as she attempted to eviscerate Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL), candidate for Attorney General, on Tuesday evening during a non-productive all-night roast on the Senate floor.  Adderall for everyone!

Warren read a letter from Coretta Scott King “that was critical of Sen. Sessions’ record on civil rights during his early years in Alabama.” Republicans leaders said “[Warren] impugned the motives, and the conduct of [their] colleague . . .” Warren was forced to stop speaking and was not permitted to make any further comments about Sessions.

Immediately liberals began to protest the action by Republicans saying that “[they] silenced Mrs. King’s voice.”

My response to all this is that the comments by Mrs. King were made nearly 30 years ago, so they may be a bit dated. Since that time Sessions has evolved and proved to many that he is an exemplary senator and worthy of the AG cabinet position. Sessions was confirmed early last night by a vote of 52-47.

-Climate change is very much in the news. The first story relates to the science of climate change. One of the most important reasons why the left and right can’t agree on what to do moving forward is that there’s no unanimity about the risks relating to climate change.

The latest controversy involves a journalist named David Rose who described “astonishing evidence” that the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration . . . rushed to publish a landmark paper that exaggerated global warming and was trying to influence the historic Paris agreement on climate change.”

-Climate change 2 involves the actions of the Chinese. They are building massive coal plants that are significant producers of “an alarming amount of carbon dioxide, the main green house gas, accelerating climate change.”The plants convert coal to synthetic natural gas.

China has huge reserves of coal. In some remote parts of the country the coal industry is the dominant employer and the principal source of revenue. Outlying provinces are defying government demands to decrease pollution because the plants are critical to the local economy.

It’s outrageous that China is “leading” the world’s efforts to decrease climate change while it is such a huge polluter. Efforts by western countries to minimize their carbon emissions are being offset by the continuing industrialization of China. The chances of the world truly uniting to fight carbon emissions are remote at best.

–Iran’s Ayatollah Kamenei is trying to compete with President Trump in a battle of insults and threats. Kamenei “caustically thanked the new American leader . . . for revealing ‘the true face’ of the United States.”

The cleric is emboldened by the inane Iranian policies of Barack Obama and is now testing Trump. Many Americans hope that the president will respond by tearing up the nuclear treaty and double down with more sanctions that will bring hardship and political turmoil to Iran.

-Appellate court judges are about to rule on the stay relating to Trump’s immigration orders. Some Americans are trying to figure out why a lower court halted Trump’s plans to prevent dangerous immigration of anyone from seven of the most violent Arab states.

The principle issue relates to presidential power. Does the president have the authority to close our borders to groups of people for national security reasons?

In 1950 the Supreme Court said, “The exclusion of aliens is a fundamental act of sovereignty . . . inherent in the executive branch.” Shortly after Congress passed a law that said the president “may by proclamation and for such periods he shall deem necessary, suspend the entering of all aliens and any class of aliens or immigrants or non-immigrants.”

Why are any courts considering Trump’s immigration order? He has the power to stop immigration at his discretion. Excerpts from the meeting between the appellate court and attorneys for both sides indicate that the judges were assessing Trump’s judgment about the national security risks. This is not within the purview of our judicial systems, which is to focus on legal and constitutional issues, not politics.

The backlash against President Trump comes as no surprise. The entire liberal community has joined together and found fault with the new president’s business career, personality and cabinet nominees.

Trump’s political agenda has been under fire long before he won the election. The name calling is relentless, and he’s been branded a xenophobe, an isolationist, a misogynist, a self-promoter and generally bad for America.

Wise supporters have filtered out his egocentrism and campaign rhetoric, and are growing to appreciate his determination to keep promises and to get things done that he believes will make America great again.

The first days of the Trump administration have been a whirlwind. We now are sure he won’t allow any other world leader or country to walk all over American interests. Trade deals are being examined carefully, illegal missile testing by Iran has resulted in new sanctions, an attempt to dump refugees on America by Australia was called into question, Israel settlements will likely be decelerated in the interest of peace, Mexico is going to pay, one way or the other, for the costs of the wall that separates our countries and so much more.

Most importantly Russia, North Korea, Iran, Syria, ISIS and other belligerent entities have been put on notice that the U.S. won’t stand aside and permit dangerous actions on their part.

In the meantime Trump and his aides are meeting with union leaders and business executives in an attempt to garner support to improve economic conditions. The response to Trump’s suggestions and willingness to work with skeptical groups has been remarkable.

There have been some bumps in the road. The restructuring of Obamacare is under way. It’s a monster project. Despite warnings from critics who insist the needy will lose their health coverage, Trump promised to provide health care to all at an affordable price. The road is and will continue to be treacherous, but Trump knows that fixing this entitlement could greatly impact his credibility moving forward.

Immigration reform is being attacked by a large group of Americans and many around the world. The introduction of sensible temporary restrictions has been labelled racist by the liberal press and others that think political correctness is more important than national security. Trump is attempting to preempt terrorist attacks in the country, while his opponents are only interested in taking action after attacks occur.

Not coincidentally Trump instituted restrictions on the same nations that Obama cited several years ago. These restrictions have been lifted by recent court orders. The Trump administration has said it would challenge these decisions in higher court.

Trump wants to examine immigration procedures and be sure that all those visiting and immigrating to the U.S. are law-abiding, and that they will embrace our values. What’s wrong with this strategy? Why are left-wing groups so intent on allowing immigrants into our country without a complete vetting? Why is a several month delay in the immigration process for certain groups who have a history of violence such a dreaded act in the minds of some?

Trump is monitoring actions by corporations to ensure they don’t adversely affect our economy or job growth. Simultaneously he is slashing regulations that are so restrictive that they hurt American competitiveness. Surely our environment is important and regulations are needed to ensure that consumers are protected. But Obama went overboard influenced by his warped vision of business and its contributions to our lifestyles.

America is gaining respect. For the time being Trump’s aggressive and somewhat unpredictable demeanor will irk world leaders, the press and liberal Americans. Over time this reputation will reap great rewards for America.

The delay by Senate Democrats of the confirmation process is outrageous. The opposition is striving to find meaning in their lives after being obliterated in the recent elections. Resistance is fruitless. Republicans hold the votes to overcome Democratic shenanigans and attempted obstruction. In the meantime important positions remained unfilled.

And finally a word on violent protests on college campuses. Observers of these despicable activities should not be fooled by the intentions of rioters. Many are anarchists that want to destroy our country. Many are paid to demonstrate and destroy property.

Even worse are the actions that impact freedom of speech at our institutions of higher learning. Dissent is good. Open discussions about varying points of view are healthy for all. Rioting against speakers on college campuses is un- American and unconstitutional. Liberals are not the only ones protected by free speech.

The Trump administration is getting off to a flying start. Many of his supporters believe that America will grow to appreciate this new president if he has the wisdom and determination to keep the promises he made during the campaign. Everything is riding on his performance.

During the next month or so Americans will witness how a soundly defeated political party can further prove that it really doesn’t deserve the support of the electorate.

Democrats, lead by Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY), will employ every dirty political trick to destroy the reputation of the nominee to SCOTUS, Judge Neil M. Gorsuch.

SCOTUS has four conservative and four liberal judges.  The death of Antonin Scalia created an opening on the court last year, which was also the final year of Barack Obama’s tenure. Scalia was a conservative and his presence gave conservatives a 5-4 edge.

Obama had an opportunity to materially change the complexion of the court and nominated Merrick Garland, a liberal judge to replace Scalia. Garland’s confirmation would have changed the court to a 5-4 balance favoring liberals. The impact of such a change would have been extraordinary. Polls show that this fact was recognized by American voters and was one of the principle reasons why many voted for Donald Trump.

Republicans refused to conduct confirmation hearings in the Senate effectively killing Garland’s chances. The rationale for refusing a vote was that no president for several decades added a judge to SCOTUS in the last year of his final term. Republicans insisted that voters in the impending election should have a say in the process. The rest is history.

Some Democrats have not stopped whining that Republicans stole the seat on the court. They discounted the logic behind Republican resistance last year. Now Democrats are anxious to avenge the treatment of Garland using Justice Gorsuch as their target.

From what we already know Gorsuch is a superlative nominee (if you aren’t a Democrat). He’s young, accomplished, a great judge (who was recently confirmed by the Senate for a lower court position by unanimous vote), well educated (Harvard Law and a doctoral degree from Oxford) and a pillar of virtue in his personal dealings.

Now Democrats are sharpening their knives and ready to destroy Gorsuch. If there is any dirt it will be revealed. If none is found they will spin his resume and create issues. Blood will be spilled and relationships in the Senate will worsen.

Since the confirmation of Gorsuch, which requires 60 votes in the Senate, will restore the court to the balance that existed before Scalia passed away, many experts think Democrat resistance will be deemed inappropriate by American voters. Given that Justice Ginsburg is 83 and close to retirement it might make more sense to save real political firepower to protect her seat thereby maintaining the 5-4 split on the court.

Democrat senators are being led by a man who is desperate to make his mark on our government. Schumer is going to rant, rave and even shed a tear or two as he ruthlessly strives to eviscerate Gorsuch. He, the country and Democrats would be better served by cooperating with those on the other side of the aisle to move America forward. A statesmanlike response to the Gorsuch nomination would be a an excellent way for Schumer to show us he can lead.