Voting For Barrett

 ALTHOUGH I AM  not only a staunch Democrat, but a democratic socialist to boot, I have decided that were I in the Senate I would vote to confirm the lady, despite the fact that I fully agree with the Democratic viewpoint that this nomination should have been made after the election, to give the American people an opportunity to update their expressed preferences.Its always better for national leaders in a democracy, or alleged democracy, to give the voters a chance to give a fresh new updated opinion on matters, and thus we should have elected the next president before nominating a supreme Court replacement. All the Republican's reasons for going ahead with the process before the election are quite cleverly contrived, but not quite clever enough. They cite a boat load of Supreme Court nominating history, ancient history. In 2016, the same history applied to Merrick Garland, but they don't mention that. We are all socialists, because we all drive without complaint on socialized public streets and highways, and we are all constitution originalists, to the extent that we can be, because we all want to read the constitution "literally", the way it was intended to be read. But nobody can be, because nobody can read the intent in the minds of the founders, and all their intentions were not expressed on paper. bear i mind that to be a true constitutional originalist one must believe that the second amendment applies only to muzzle loading muskets, and not nineteenth or twentieth century firearms. All words on all paper require that the reader interpret the words, regardless of what the author meant, the reader must interpret the author's words as best as he or she can.The author's actual meaning involves the reader's interpretation. Even if all nine court members were ultra conservative, we can have faith that they still  might render rulings amenable to liberal ideology. If the Republicans truly had faith in the integrity of the supreme court, they would not be so hell bent on placing ultra conservatives on the high court. Nobody is qualified to sit on the Supreme Court, but Amy Coney Barrett, who is not a hot dog, is as qualified as most people. And, once again, we must stop this nonsense of nominating people to the court because of  their political ideologies if we want and expect the court to be non political. Only moderates or politically unaffiliated people need apply.