|
BoscoX -> RE: Republicans jackals go 'nuclear' (4/6/2017 2:36:50 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Musicmystery
quote:
ORIGINAL: BamaD
quote:
ORIGINAL: Musicmystery
Not at all. "Who started this?" and "Is it right?" aren't the same.
Refusing to hold hearings was the bullshit that brought us to this episode.
Let the backfiring and consequences begin. And that won't be Reid's fault.
When it's your hand holding the knife, it's no only else who cut your throat.
The Dems created this situation in less you think it is "far" that (as we had with Reid) Leftist judges get on the court with 51 votes and conservatives need 60.
During Obama's first four years, the Republicans use the filibuster 79 times, more than half of the entire history of the Senate. Then, he spent over a year using to even hold a hearing on Obamas Supreme Court nomination. That's bullshit. Spin it anyway you like. But it's still bullshit.
When this bites them in the ass, do you think they'll still say well we had no choice the Democrats made us cut Our throats?
Many Dems are honest enough to admit that they are now purely obstructionists, and that no pick would make it by them. Rules, debate, decorum, honesty, civility, are no longer home in the Democrat party in any way, and because of that they leave the party that the people have chosen to put into power no choice other than to treat them like little children and put them in time out
Democrats are openly and blatantly extreme childish hypocrites on the Supreme Court issue: I posted the following example of this before, hits Dem apologists right where their balls would be if they had the balls required to be real about things
quote:
Chuck Schumer Flip-Flops on His Flip-Flop on Obstructing Supreme Court Nominees
[image]http://static01.mediaite.com/med/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/schumer.jpg[/image]
Democratic Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer flip-flopped Tuesday on his flip-flop on whether the Senate should filibuster and obstruct the president’s Supreme Court nominees.
In 2007, the New York Senator said that the Democratic majority should block any of President George W. Bush’s remaining Supreme Court nominations. “”We should reverse the presumption of confirmation… we should not confirm any Bush nominee to the Supreme Court except in extraordinary circumstances,” he argued. “They must prove by actions not words that they are in the mainstream rather than we have to prove that they are not.”
Schumer’s stance was at the time was unprecedented. Certainly judicial nominations had taken on a partisan bent over the prior two decades, but there had always been lip service to the notion that the president gets the nominee he wants (the “presumption” Schumer alludes to above). The party out of power typically crafted some pretense for opposing the nominee. Schumer dropped the act and admitted that it didn’t matter who Bush nominated, Democrats should oppose them no matter what.
Flash-forward to 2016, when a vacancy opened up on the Supreme Court following the death of Antonin Scalia. This time of course President Barack Obama was the one selecting his replacement, and Schumer was horrified that Republicans were blocking his eventual nominee before he or she was even announced.
Here, [Mitch McConnell] doesn’t even know who the president’s going to propose and he said, no, we’re not having hearings; we’re not going to go forward to leave the Supreme Court vacant at 300 days in a divided time. This kind of obstructionism isn’t going to last. And you know, we Democrats didn’t do this.
…even though that’s exactly what Schumer proposed a decade earlier.
When Merrick Garland was eventually nominated, Schumer then urged Republicans in a statement to hold hearings on the nomination, warning of “judicial chaos” if there were only eight justices:
Senate Republicans need to do their job and give Judge Garland the hearing and vote he deserves because the American people deserve a fully functioning court. Having a deadlocked, 4-4 court could lead to judicial chaos surrounding environmental protections, voting rights, and so many other issues that are important to everyday Americans. This delay has gone on long enough, it’s time for the Senate to do the job we were elected to do.
Which brings us to Schumer’s interview with MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow Tuesday night. Maddow argued that the Democrats should refuse to fill the empty seat for the entirety of Trump’s four-year presidency.
“It’s hard for me to imagine a nominee that Donald Trump would choose that would get Republican support that we could support. So you’re right,” he responded.
“And so you will do your best to hold the seat open?” asked Maddow.
“Absolutely,” Schumer said.
Huh. I guess “judicial chaos” isn’t that bad after all, if we can now afford four whole years of it.
More of Schumer flip-flopping on his flip-flops here
|
|
|
|
