In connection with one of my comments, I rated this one. My approach to the ratings is generally "sorta" for anything that is not insightful (those get "good") or totally without thought ("no" which I hardly ever give). Anything without a nasty personal attack gets "yes" on civility and I think only one or two have gotten "no."

Now that I can comment without multiple choice, I note that I find this highly emotional viewpoint and use of the very-charged terms "racism, misogyny and fascism" to be unconstructive and unlikely to help our country to survive and then recover from a situation I (and probably you) view as already (not potentially, as was true a week ago) nearly catastrophic. (I would have said "disastrous" but that is one of the words in Trump's 300-word vocabulary.)

As a factual matter, Garland's nomination is no longer before the Senate. If Gorsuch had refused, Trump could have gone down a roster and undoubtedly found someone we would regard as much worse than he is.