Hand-picked and farm-fresh–
⇒Linked articles in bold purple

◆ Neil Gorsuch is virtually certain to win Senate confirmation to go on the Supreme Court.

⇒Dick Durbin, #2 on the Senate Democratic side, has announced that he will not filibuster Gorsuch. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) has said the same thing.  (State Journal Register and Daily Caller)

Comment: Those statements clinch an up-or-down vote for Gorsuch, which he will win and take a seat on the Supreme Court.

If Democrats tried to fight this to the bitter end, they would still have lost and jeopardized their most vulnerable candidates, up for election in 2018. Given those calculations and Gorsuch’s very strong résumé, Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, Dick Durbin, and other Democratic leaders decided to keep their ammunition dry for a more problematic nominee.

Related Story: The Washington Post captures the Democratic leadership’s problem with this headline:

“Schumer’s dilemma: Satisfying the base while protecting his minority” (Washington Post)

◆ Rep. Keith Ellison, running for Chair of the Democratic National Committee, gets hit from the left. The Nation magazine says he is lying about his ties to Louis Farrakhan and black-nationalism (The Nation via Legal Insurrection blog)

◆ At Powerline blog: “Keith Ellison’s Back Pages” continues Scott Johnson’s fine digging into the Minnesota representative’s squirrely background 

Comment: Republicans are gleeful Ellison is a strong candidate to lead the DNC; if they had a vote, he would win in a landslide. And they laugh out loud that his opponent, former Labor Secretary Tom Perez, is considered more “centrist.” That just tells you how far left the center of the party has moved. 

◆ Two more Hamas terrorists die as their tunnel collapses. (Reuters) Hmmm. Seems to happen a lot. 

◆ “Shutting down Speech by Elizabeth Warren, G.O.P. Amplifies Her Message,” says NYT

Comment: Exactly. The Times thinks that is awful. Nope, not for Republicans and not for the Senate.

Why did Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell do it? There are several possible reasons.

• One is that McConnell wanted to cool the increasingly vitriolic language on the Senate floor and restore normal Senate rules. That is his public explanation.
• Or McConnell might have made a mistake and amplified the voice of an opponent. The NYT likes that one.
• Here’s my favorite: McConnell thinks Elizabeth Warren represents everything that keeps Democrats in the minority. She has a national constituency that stretches from Cambridge to Amherst to Madison to Berkeley…and that’s it. She is toxic to any Democratic effort to win back the Senate. The New York Times would miss that because she is their kind of politician. But there are not many folks in Ohio or Michigan who agree. “Let her be the shrill, elite voice of her party,” sly ole Mitch could be thinking.

◆ A blast from the past

♦♦♦♦♦♦♦

♥ Hat Tip for helpful suggestions:
◆ Patrick Crane for posting the Ovaltine Picture in “Forgotten Chicago”