I guess what I am looking for is proactive dialog. If we don’t discuss solutions to the issue, then all we have left is complaints.
There are no "solutions" to personal morality.
When Merrick Garland was nominated by President Obama, McConnell
could have held the hearings, grilled Garland like a well-done cheeseburger, and then had his Senate majority vote "no." Instead, he refused to hold a hearing.
His actions were legal, but cowardly.
When Amy Coney Barrett was appointed by Donald, McConnell
could have been consistent with his previous stated position and delayed the hearing. Instead, he rushed Barrett's confirmation through in record time.
His actions were legal, but hypocritical.
I consider cowardice and hypocrisy to be immoral because I don't need someone to write such things down first.
Can you believe that there are people out there who are
so morally bankrupt themselves that they can
only determine "right" or "wrong" by what people they consider above them say and do? Even people they would nominally consider their "enemies"?
"___________ said/did the thing (or never said
not to), so it must be moral."
Pathetic, ain't it?
Sadly, there's nothing to be done for such people except to expose their deficient morality for what it is. It does nothing to correct their own behavior because they take no responsibility for their own (nonexistent) morals, but it does turn them into a useful object lesson for observers.
So at least they're good for something.