Schumer "block Bush nominees"

I am sure the members of the democrat party on JPP will find a way to twist themselves in knots saying it doesn't matter.

My guess is they will just say "yeah, but did it actually happen"

Just like they think the democrat party didn't lie about Saddams WMD even though they made the same independent claims about them as Bush

What I don't get about people like the Bush clan is that they see their family get savaged by the media and the democrat party yet still try to suck up to them. It is like they see the democrats as the cool kids and they just want to get invited to all of the party's.

The American people see through this shit which is why Jeb is going nowhere and unfortunately Trump is surging.
 
schumers stance and obamas veto were all vehemently protested by the libs on this board. they will all tell you that they didn't approve of those tactics.......
 
blocking nominees is one thing.


what has your party done to the courts under your rule?


decimated them


Scalia himself said it
 
Obama should nominate- unlike Obama when he was a senator, republicans should vote to approve or reject his nominee. If the Justice he nominates is liberal, as my representatives I want them to vote no. I want a balanced court.
 
J Craft said:
Obama should nominate- unlike Obama when he was a senator, republicans should vote to approve or reject his nominee. If the Justice he nominates is liberal, as my representatives I want them to vote no. I want a balanced court.
Click to expand...

BAM, how Constitutional of you!
 
I want the court the American people voted for



the people picked Obama


more people are more liberal than con

reflect the people NOT JUST YOUR SIDE


your vote is not the only vote that matters
 
If the situation was reversed, Dems would be doing exactly what the GOP is doing now.

And they'd be punished for it on election day - just like the GOP likely will.
 
J Craft said:
The GOP will not be punished. Republicans and right leaning independents, want a balanced court.
Click to expand...

This argument is such bull. They want to hold out so they can replace Scalia w/ a conservative - but when Ginsburg retires, likely in the next term, will a GOP President replace her with a liberal for a "balanced court"?

Stop convincing yourself of the lie. This is purely political.
 
Thing1 said:
This argument is such bull. They want to hold out so they can replace Scalia w/ a conservative - but when Ginsburg retires, likely in the next term, will a GOP President replace her with a liberal for a "balanced court"?

Stop convincing yourself of the lie. This is purely political.
Click to expand...

Right now, with 8 the court leans liberal with Kennedy. If Scalia is replaced with a liberal it's a liberal lock. The country, those who are paying attention, know this. If Scalia and Ginsberg are replaced like for like, the court still tilts left, but isn't a lock. If They are both replaced conservative it's a lean right court, but isn't a lock.
 
evince said:
I want the court the American people voted for



the people picked Obama


more people are more liberal than con

reflect the people NOT JUST YOUR SIDE


your vote is not the only vote that matters
Click to expand...

Go whine to the Democrat party, who supported this behavior in 2007.
 
J Craft said:
Right now, with 8 the court leans liberal with Kennedy. If Scalia is replaced with a liberal it's a liberal lock. The country, those who are paying attention, know this. If Scalia and Ginsberg are replaced like for like, the court still tilts left, but isn't a lock. If They are both replaced conservative it's a lean right court, but isn't a lock.
Click to expand...

And what about Kennedy? There are 3 justices in their 80's right now.

The founders never said anything about maintaining a "balanced court," or replacing conservatives with conservatives. There is no moral, legal or consititutional justification for what the GOP is planning to do right now.

I hope this backfires in a huge way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top