BoscoX
Posts: 11350
Joined: 12/10/2016
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Musicmystery
quote:
ORIGINAL: BamaD
quote:
ORIGINAL: BoscoX
quote:
ORIGINAL: Musicmystery
Don't be an idiot.
They needed 8 votes. Eight! There's no candidate that could have gotten 8 votes, even with deals?
They could have held a hearing on Obama's pick, who was pretty mainstream, and just voted him down, next.
Nope. They had to force it through. But when you do that, you have to understand the new rules apply all the way around.
And they just bit their own future asses.
THAT'S the damn point. Not what I think they should do. Just an appreciation for what they actually did do...and what it means.
Your real gripe is that the Republicans are going by the same standard as the Dems
Bama is right. You are pissed off that the winners are acting like winners, and using the exact same tactics the Dems would be using were the situation reversed
Correction, did act when the reverse was true.
Even not refusing to grant Obama a Supreme Court seat was their idea first.
After all even Biden said that they shouldn't grant a SCOTUS seat in the last year of his term,
(of course that was for a Republican {and it was his first term}.
You only see what you want to see.
First, I have, on these forums, acknowledged the idiocy of Schumer, Biden, and the role Reid played. I'm not the partisan hack you are. (I didn't vote for any Democrats or Republicans in the election)
Second, "Mom! They did it too!" is as dumb a defense now as it was when you were 4.
Third, I'm not even arguing the morality or cause and effect to this moment. Breath, stop fighting wars that no one is fighting with you, and read.
I'm pointing out that in this action, McConnell loses this tool the next time they are in the minority. And, given overwhelming demographic evidence, that's going to be soon and for the foreseeable future. Hence, this is very short-term thinking, when McConnell could have worked out something he likes that Schumer would have tolerated--or at least 8 Senators--and keep all his future options.
And Finally, actually refusing to hold hearings for a year was a bullshit move, as was saying he'd continue to refuse if Clinton won.
Is that the new normal? If your party doesn't control both the WH and the Senate, no Justice can get a hearing, let alone a vote?
You really think that's a good idea?
Because this gives future Dems (not the most trustworthy folks either) cart Blanche to install whomever they want.
Then come back and tell me this was an awesome idea, and had to be done.
You are a moron. The only alternative is to let the "liberals" have everything their way, and that is not an option. They leave no good alternatives. To compromise is to give in because they, you, demand everything - once we compromise, you, they, demand we compromise some more. And that pattern repeated until "liberals" have it all
So fuck you
You, they, want civil war, look at the riots. "Liberals" are literally assaulting people in the streets for attending opposition speeches, going to opposition political rallies. "Liberals" are working to undermine and overthrow our duly elected government. "Liberals" respect no authority, understand only force, and overwhelming power. Giving an inch to "liberals" is a mistake every time
And it is the Democrat party driving us toward civil war, and demanding we keep compromising until we are the third world hell hole of Bernie Sander's wet dreams
Fuck you
_____________________________
Thought Criminal
|
RE: Republicans jackals go 'nuclear' - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread