Log in

Letter to the editor: Critic needs history lesson

Posted 4/11/17

Sibyl Krebs, in her rambling letter, displayed an unfortunate lack of knowledge about what transpired in 1992 and 2016, regarding the Supreme Court.

Certainly she’s not so uninformed as to not …

You must be a member to read this story.

Join our family of readers for as little as $5 per month and support local, unbiased journalism.


Already have an account? Log in to continue.

Current print subscribers can create a free account by clicking here

Otherwise, follow the link below to join.

To Our Valued Readers –

Visitors to our website will be limited to five stories per month unless they opt to subscribe. The five stories do not include our exclusive content written by our journalists.

For $6.99, less than 20 cents a day, digital subscribers will receive unlimited access to YourValley.net, including exclusive content from our newsroom and access to our Daily Independent e-edition.

Our commitment to balanced, fair reporting and local coverage provides insight and perspective not found anywhere else.

Your financial commitment will help to preserve the kind of honest journalism produced by our reporters and editors. We trust you agree that independent journalism is an essential component of our democracy. Please click here to subscribe.

Sincerely,
Charlene Bisson, Publisher, Independent Newsmedia

Please log in to continue

Log in
I am anchor

Letter to the editor: Critic needs history lesson

Posted
Sibyl Krebs, in her rambling letter, displayed an unfortunate lack of knowledge about what transpired in 1992 and 2016, regarding the Supreme Court.
Certainly she’s not so uninformed as to not know that George H.W. Bush placed both David Souter and Clarence Thomas on the Supreme Court!
By referencing Biden’s Senate speech, June 25, 1992, she misses completely the difference in circumstances in 2016.
Biden didn’t argue for a delay until the next president began his term, only that IF the situation arose, the process should be delayed until after the election, three months away.
Then, with Bush still the sitting president, hearings would be held on his nominee.
In 2016, McConnell and his Senate thugs refused the sitting president (Obama) his legal opportunity to have hearings on his nominee, incorrectly stating that the right to nominate belonged to whomever was elected for the next presidential term.
Secondly, there was no Supreme Court seat to fill in 1992, it was a rhetorical scenario.
In 2016, there was an empty seat and 11 months left in President Obama’s term.
Thirdly, the current Republican Senate only wanted to deny President Obama the opportunity to seat a justice.
Biden’s goal was to prevent a nomination being made just days and/or weeks before the conventions were to be held by both parties stating that “is not fair to the president, to the nominee, or to the Senate itself.”
Sorry, Sibyl, but like all people who choose to believe what they’ve been spoon-fed rather than doing their own research, you’ve been had.

Patricia Shanholtzer
Sun City West