Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 25 of 25

Thread: PRES. MORON ON ROOSEVELDT ATTEMPT TO PACK SCOTUS

  1. #16 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2020
    Posts
    2,612
    Thanks
    3,167
    Thanked 725 Times in 540 Posts
    Groans
    188
    Groaned 125 Times in 118 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Grokmaster View Post
    I DIDN'T WRITE THE ARTICLE, STUPIDFUCK.

    READ IT...OR HAVE ONE OF THE GROWNUPS READ IT TO YOU.
    You're the one who posted it, as a defense, moron.

    Another teabagger (www.teaparty.org) who should have taken Dotard's "advanced" reading "comprehension" correspondence course from Trump U.

  2. #17 | Top
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Living in rural America, "clinging to guns and religion"s"
    Posts
    25,559
    Thanks
    4,019
    Thanked 14,252 Times in 10,609 Posts
    Groans
    122
    Groaned 295 Times in 282 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cinnabar View Post
    The majority of Americans should not governed by the ass-backwards notions of the minority. The SCOTUS does not reflect the opinions and beliefs of the majority of Americans. The Christofascist right needs to die off as the dinosaurs did. They are useless and regressive and ruining life for the people who want to live in the 21st century. They belong in the dustbin of history and good effing riddance!
    You should die off along with haters like you. Fuck you and die!
    Common sense is not a gift, it's a punishment because you have to deal with everyone who doesn't have it.

  3. #18 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    18,134
    Thanks
    3,581
    Thanked 5,359 Times in 4,272 Posts
    Groans
    605
    Groaned 219 Times in 207 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cinnabar View Post
    The majority of Americans should not governed by the ass-backwards notions of the minority. The SCOTUS does not reflect the opinions and beliefs of the majority of Americans. The Christofascist right needs to die off as the dinosaurs did. They are useless and regressive and ruining life for the people who want to live in the 21st century. They belong in the dustbin of history and good effing riddance!
    Yeah...uh...that's the point. Rule of Law, not mob rule. You never took a civics class in high school?
    Why Trump? Because Fuck You that's why.

  4. #19 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Posts
    17,704
    Thanks
    9,654
    Thanked 9,130 Times in 6,286 Posts
    Groans
    179
    Groaned 321 Times in 315 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by no worries View Post
    You're the one who posted it, as a defense, moron.

    Another teabagger (www.teaparty.org) who should have taken Dotard's "advanced" reading "comprehension" correspondence course from Trump U.
    YEAH...DUMBFUCK, AND IT DETAILS THE HYPOCRATS DOING THE SAME POLITICAL MANUEVER.

    1. Sen Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said in 2007 that President George W. Bush shouldn’t get to pick any more Supreme Court justices because Schumer was afraid the bench leaned too far Right. Schumer made this remark a whole 19 months before the next president was inaugurated.

    “We should not confirm any Bush nominee to the Supreme Court, except in extraordinary circumstances,” Schumer said in a speech to the liberal American Constitution Society. “They must prove by actions, not words, that they are in the mainstream rather than we have to prove that they are not.”

    2. His remarks in 2007 weren’t the only time Schumer vowed to stop a Republican nominee. In 2004, he said he would do everything in his power to stop Bush from elevating Charles Pickering to a federal appeals court in 2004.

    “I’m prepared to do everything I can to stop the nomination of Justice Pickering,” Schumer said. “We can do a lot better.”

    3. Schumer again promised to make the nomination process difficult for President Bush amid a confirmation battle over Carolyn Kuhl, who was nominated as a judge to the Ninth Circuit Court.

    In 2004, his office released a statement saying Senate Democrats planned to “hold nominations until the White House commits to stop abusing the advise and consent process.”

    The statement was part of Democratic coalition to stop Bush from using his recess appointing powers. The president eventually conceded and promised he would stop appointing judges while Congress was on vacation in exchange for them stopping filibustering.

    4. Then-Senator Barack Obama said in 2006 that he supported the Democratic-led filibuster to stop Justice Samuel Alito from making it to the Supreme Court.

    There are some who believe that the president, having won the election, should have complete authority to appoint his nominee…that once you get beyond intellect and personal character, there should be no further question as to whether the judge should be confirmed. I disagree with this view.

    Obama wasn’t the only Democratic senator to oppose Alito’s nomination. The late Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.) led an opposition coalition, which attempted to filibuster to block the confirmation process. Kennedy was joined by Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.), Sen. Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.), Sen. Ken Salazar (D-Colo.), and Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.), who publicly stated they opposed Alito’s confirmation.

    “The record demonstrates that we cannot count on Judge Alito to blow the whistle when the president is out of bounds,” Kennedy said.

    5. In 1960, the Democratic-controlled Senate passed a resolution to block President Eisenhower from being able to make any more recess appointments to the Supreme Court. The resolution stated:

    Expressing the sense of the Senate that the president should not make recess appointments to the Supreme Court, except to prevent or end a breakdown in the administration of the Court’s business.

    6. Kennedy led a gang of eight senators in 2003 to block Bush nominee Miguel Estrada from rising to the Court of Appeals.

    “Instead of looking for candidates who are extreme ideologues, the president should work with the Senate in nominating individuals who have the highest qualifications,” Kennedy said, while taking a victory lap after the Bush administration withdrew Estrada’s nomination.

    7. The AFL-CIO union vowed to block then-President Ronald Reagan’s nominee Robert Bork by soiling his public reputation so badly that any Democratic senator who voted in favor of confirming him would have to explain it to his constituents. Kennedy continued this line of rhetoric in a well-known floor speech. He infamously said:

    Robert Bork’s America is a land in which women would be forced into back-alley abortions, blacks would sit at segregated lunch counters, rogue police could break down citizens’ doors in midnight raids, schoolchildren could not be taught about evolution, writers and artists could be censored at the whim of the Government.

    8. Joe Biden wrote the playbook for how to “bork” a Supreme Court nominee, a descriptive verb that now means to publicly pillory a nominee’s reputation to make it politically difficult for senators to vote for them. It’s named, of course, after what Democrats did to Robert Bork.

    Then-Senator Biden was the chair of the judiciary committee, and he put together what’s now been deemed a “Biden report,” a document detailing Bork’s judicial history and personal background. The judiciary committee voted against Bork’s confirmation by a vote of 9-5.

    9. Democratic groups vowed to “bork” Justice Clarence Thomas, George H.W. Bush’s nominee to the Supreme Court. They failed, but the personal attacks on Thomas were brutal.

    “We’re going to bork him,” said National Organization for Women’s Flo Kennedy. “We need to kill him politically.”

    10. In 2008, Democrats banded together to filibuster Bush’s decision to nominate Priscilla Owen to a federal circuit court.

    Eleanor Smeal, president of the Feminist Majority Foundation, urged Senate Democrats to “stand up and fight as they have been doing with Miguel Estrada.”

    “At this time of global turmoil, we don’t need extremists in the courts willing to make a Dred Scott decision in the area of women’s fundamental rights,” she said.



    CAN'T FUCKING READ, IDIOT ??


    IRRELEVANT TO PRES. MORON'S IDIOCY....AND HYPOCRISY...
    TRUMP WILL TAKE FORTY STATES...UNLESS THE SAME IDIOTS WHO BROUGHT US THE 2020 DUNCE-O-CRAT IOWA CLUSTERFUCK CONTINUE THEIR SEDITIOUS ACTIVITIES...THEN HE WILL WIN EVEN MORE ..UNLESS THE RED CHINESE AND DNC COLLUDE, USE A PANDEMIC, AND THEN THE DEMOCRATS VIOLATE ARTICLE II OF THE CONSTITUTION, TO FACILLITATE MILLIONS OF ILLEGAL, UNVETTED, MAIL IN BALLOTS IN THE DARK OF NIGHT..


    De Oppresso Liber

  5. #20 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2020
    Posts
    2,612
    Thanks
    3,167
    Thanked 725 Times in 540 Posts
    Groans
    188
    Groaned 125 Times in 118 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Grokmaster View Post
    YEAH...DUMBFUCK, AND IT DETAILS THE HYPOCRATS DOING THE SAME POLITICAL MANUEVER.

    1. Sen Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said in 2007 that President George W. Bush shouldn’t get to pick any more Supreme Court justices because Schumer was afraid the bench leaned too far Right. Schumer made this remark a whole 19 months before the next president was inaugurated.

    “We should not confirm any Bush nominee to the Supreme Court, except in extraordinary circumstances,” Schumer said in a speech to the liberal American Constitution Society. “They must prove by actions, not words, that they are in the mainstream rather than we have to prove that they are not.”

    2. His remarks in 2007 weren’t the only time Schumer vowed to stop a Republican nominee. In 2004, he said he would do everything in his power to stop Bush from elevating Charles Pickering to a federal appeals court in 2004.

    “I’m prepared to do everything I can to stop the nomination of Justice Pickering,” Schumer said. “We can do a lot better.”

    3. Schumer again promised to make the nomination process difficult for President Bush amid a confirmation battle over Carolyn Kuhl, who was nominated as a judge to the Ninth Circuit Court.

    In 2004, his office released a statement saying Senate Democrats planned to “hold nominations until the White House commits to stop abusing the advise and consent process.”

    The statement was part of Democratic coalition to stop Bush from using his recess appointing powers. The president eventually conceded and promised he would stop appointing judges while Congress was on vacation in exchange for them stopping filibustering.

    4. Then-Senator Barack Obama said in 2006 that he supported the Democratic-led filibuster to stop Justice Samuel Alito from making it to the Supreme Court.

    There are some who believe that the president, having won the election, should have complete authority to appoint his nominee…that once you get beyond intellect and personal character, there should be no further question as to whether the judge should be confirmed. I disagree with this view.

    Obama wasn’t the only Democratic senator to oppose Alito’s nomination. The late Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.) led an opposition coalition, which attempted to filibuster to block the confirmation process. Kennedy was joined by Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.), Sen. Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.), Sen. Ken Salazar (D-Colo.), and Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.), who publicly stated they opposed Alito’s confirmation.

    “The record demonstrates that we cannot count on Judge Alito to blow the whistle when the president is out of bounds,” Kennedy said.

    5. In 1960, the Democratic-controlled Senate passed a resolution to block President Eisenhower from being able to make any more recess appointments to the Supreme Court. The resolution stated:

    Expressing the sense of the Senate that the president should not make recess appointments to the Supreme Court, except to prevent or end a breakdown in the administration of the Court’s business.

    6. Kennedy led a gang of eight senators in 2003 to block Bush nominee Miguel Estrada from rising to the Court of Appeals.

    “Instead of looking for candidates who are extreme ideologues, the president should work with the Senate in nominating individuals who have the highest qualifications,” Kennedy said, while taking a victory lap after the Bush administration withdrew Estrada’s nomination.

    7. The AFL-CIO union vowed to block then-President Ronald Reagan’s nominee Robert Bork by soiling his public reputation so badly that any Democratic senator who voted in favor of confirming him would have to explain it to his constituents. Kennedy continued this line of rhetoric in a well-known floor speech. He infamously said:

    Robert Bork’s America is a land in which women would be forced into back-alley abortions, blacks would sit at segregated lunch counters, rogue police could break down citizens’ doors in midnight raids, schoolchildren could not be taught about evolution, writers and artists could be censored at the whim of the Government.

    8. Joe Biden wrote the playbook for how to “bork” a Supreme Court nominee, a descriptive verb that now means to publicly pillory a nominee’s reputation to make it politically difficult for senators to vote for them. It’s named, of course, after what Democrats did to Robert Bork.

    Then-Senator Biden was the chair of the judiciary committee, and he put together what’s now been deemed a “Biden report,” a document detailing Bork’s judicial history and personal background. The judiciary committee voted against Bork’s confirmation by a vote of 9-5.

    9. Democratic groups vowed to “bork” Justice Clarence Thomas, George H.W. Bush’s nominee to the Supreme Court. They failed, but the personal attacks on Thomas were brutal.

    “We’re going to bork him,” said National Organization for Women’s Flo Kennedy. “We need to kill him politically.”

    10. In 2008, Democrats banded together to filibuster Bush’s decision to nominate Priscilla Owen to a federal circuit court.

    Eleanor Smeal, president of the Feminist Majority Foundation, urged Senate Democrats to “stand up and fight as they have been doing with Miguel Estrada.”

    “At this time of global turmoil, we don’t need extremists in the courts willing to make a Dred Scott decision in the area of women’s fundamental rights,” she said.



    CAN'T FUCKING READ, IDIOT ??


    IRRELEVANT TO PRES. MORON'S IDIOCY....AND HYPOCRISY...
    When asked about the kind of justices he would appoint to the Supreme Court, President George W. Bush responded: "I would pick people that would be strict constructionists. We've got plenty of lawmakers in Washington, D.C. Legislators make law. Judges interpret the Constitution. ... And that's the kind of judge I'm going to put on there." In more detail, Bush in 1999 told reporter Fred Barnes of the conservative magazine The Weekly Standard that he would nominate judges to the court in the mold of originalist

    In other words.........................Teabaggers (www.teaparty.org)

    Circumstances changed in 2005, due to the 2004 elections. With President Bush winning re-election and the Republicans increasing their Senate majority to 55—45 for the 109th Congress, the "nuclear option" became a more viable strategy to ensure confirmation. On May 24, 2005, seven moderate senators of each party, called the Gang of 14, in a deal to avoid the use of the "nuclear option", agreed to drop the filibuster against three of the seven remaining affected court of appeals nominees.

    Unexpectedly, on July 1, 2005, it was not Rehnquist who announced his retirement, but O'Connor. On July 12, Bush met at the White House with the party leaders and ranking Judiciary Committee members from the two major parties – Republicans Bill Frist and Arlen Specter, and Democrats Reid and Patrick Leahy – to discuss the nomination process.

    See they were negotiating.

    Moscow McTurtle and Dotard didn't do any of that.

  6. #21 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    18,134
    Thanks
    3,581
    Thanked 5,359 Times in 4,272 Posts
    Groans
    605
    Groaned 219 Times in 207 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by no worries View Post
    When asked about the kind of justices he would appoint to the Supreme Court, President George W. Bush responded: "I would pick people that would be strict constructionists. We've got plenty of lawmakers in Washington, D.C. Legislators make law. Judges interpret the Constitution. ... And that's the kind of judge I'm going to put on there." In more detail, Bush in 1999 told reporter Fred Barnes of the conservative magazine The Weekly Standard that he would nominate judges to the court in the mold of originalist

    In other words.........................Teabaggers (www.teaparty.org)

    Circumstances changed in 2005, due to the 2004 elections. With President Bush winning re-election and the Republicans increasing their Senate majority to 55—45 for the 109th Congress, the "nuclear option" became a more viable strategy to ensure confirmation. On May 24, 2005, seven moderate senators of each party, called the Gang of 14, in a deal to avoid the use of the "nuclear option", agreed to drop the filibuster against three of the seven remaining affected court of appeals nominees.

    Unexpectedly, on July 1, 2005, it was not Rehnquist who announced his retirement, but O'Connor. On July 12, Bush met at the White House with the party leaders and ranking Judiciary Committee members from the two major parties – Republicans Bill Frist and Arlen Specter, and Democrats Reid and Patrick Leahy – to discuss the nomination process.

    See they were negotiating.

    Moscow McTurtle and Dotard didn't do any of that.
    Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    Why Trump? Because Fuck You that's why.

  7. #22 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2020
    Posts
    2,612
    Thanks
    3,167
    Thanked 725 Times in 540 Posts
    Groans
    188
    Groaned 125 Times in 118 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Guille View Post
    Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    "We're all victims. Everybody here, all these thousands of people here tonight, they're all victims. Every one of you."

    Dotard and his cult's rallying cry.

  8. #23 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    18,134
    Thanks
    3,581
    Thanked 5,359 Times in 4,272 Posts
    Groans
    605
    Groaned 219 Times in 207 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by no worries View Post
    "We're all victims. Everybody here, all these thousands of people here tonight, they're all victims. Every one of you."

    Dotard and his cult's rallying cry.
    Ok, whatever. You're kinda dumb eh?
    Why Trump? Because Fuck You that's why.

  9. #24 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2020
    Posts
    2,612
    Thanks
    3,167
    Thanked 725 Times in 540 Posts
    Groans
    188
    Groaned 125 Times in 118 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Guille View Post
    Ok, whatever. You're kinda dumb eh?
    Smart enough, not to vote for, support and defend a lying, moron, even AFTER the orange, traitor LOST the election.

    THAT'S a special kind of stupid.

    The kids on the short bus, make you take the shorter bus.

  10. #25 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    18,134
    Thanks
    3,581
    Thanked 5,359 Times in 4,272 Posts
    Groans
    605
    Groaned 219 Times in 207 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by no worries View Post
    Smart enough, not to vote for, support and defend a lying, moron, even AFTER the orange, traitor LOST the election.

    THAT'S a special kind of stupid.

    The kids on the short bus, make you take the shorter bus.
    Ok monkey.
    Why Trump? Because Fuck You that's why.

Similar Threads

  1. What if dems pack the SCOTUS and the SCOTUS says the law is unconstitutional?
    By Text Drivers are Killers in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 49
    Last Post: 04-17-2021, 02:57 AM
  2. Replies: 9
    Last Post: 03-20-2021, 02:20 PM
  3. WHERE'S BIDEN HIDEN'???? PRES>MORON ON THE LAMB
    By Grokmaster in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 58
    Last Post: 03-08-2021, 05:23 PM
  4. Replies: 27
    Last Post: 02-23-2021, 01:15 PM
  5. PRES.MORON AND THE DUNCE-O-CRATS GOING AFTER LAW-ABIDING GUN OWNERS
    By Grokmaster in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 54
    Last Post: 02-18-2021, 01:48 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Rules

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •