Hey GayRod was the democrat party violating the US Constitution?

[canceled.2021.1]

When they didn't allow Judge Bork to come up for a vote?

When they didn't allow Miguel Estrada to come up for a vote via a filibuster?

When they didn't allow Priscilla Owens to come up for a vote via a filibuster?

When they didn't allow Janice Rogers Brown to come up for a vote via a filibuster?

When then Senator Obama joined a filibuster to delay the vote on Alito?

Was Harry Reid a sexist against Priscilla Owens? Was he a sexist/racist against Janice Rogers Brown? Was a he a racist against Miguel Estrada?

And don't give me the "two wrongs don't make a right" bullshit, or lamely say "they are hypocrites". Show me any thread started by you back then where you chastised the democrat party and called them out for unconstitutional actions. If you can't do that then you are completely full of shit right now on this issue. Your party made their judicial bed now I hope they have to fucking lie in it

BTW it was the democrat party in the US Senate that invented the filibuster of judicial appointments

http://humanevents.com/2005/05/19/j...rats-clintonian-definition-of-what-a-vote-is/

 

[Jarod]

When they didn't allow Judge Bork to come up for a vote?

When they didn't allow Miguel Estrada to come up for a vote via a filibuster?

When they didn't allow Priscilla Owens to come up for a vote via a filibuster?

When they didn't allow Janice Rogers Brown to come up for a vote via a filibuster?

When then Senator Obama joined a filibuster to delay the vote on Alito?

Was Harry Reid a sexist against Priscilla Owens? Was he a sexist/racist against Janice Rogers Brown? Was a he a racist against Miguel Estrada?

And don't give me the "two wrongs don't make a right" bullshit, or lamely say "they are hypocrites". Show me any thread started by you back then where you chastised the democrat party and called them out for unconstitutional actions. If you can't do that then you are completely full of shit right now on this issue. Your party made their judicial bed now I hope they have to fucking lie in it

Not sure all that happened, I think Bork, for example, got a vote.

However in accurate your historical record is, I will try to answer the spirit of your question.

Personally, I don't think filibuster is a violation of the Constitution, it does not specifically violate any of the rules. I do think filibuster is undemocratic and not within the spirit of the Constitution. I don't like it and think it should not be used. I don't like it when Republicans do it, and I don't like it when Democrats do it.

 

[Jarod]

Robert Bork got a vote...

42 Senators voting in favor and 58 voting against!

I don't have a problem with senators voting against a nominee, I do have a problem with them refusing to hold a vote.

 

[canceled.2021.1]

Not sure all that happened, I think Bork, for example, got a vote.

However in accurate your historical record is, I will try to answer the spirit of your question.

Personally, I don't think filibuster is a violation of the Constitution, it does not specifically violate any of the rules. I do think filibuster is undemocratic and not within the spirit of the Constitution. I don't like it and think it should not be used. I don't like it when Republicans do it, and I don't like it when Democrats do it.

I was wrong. Bork did get a vote in the Senate.

However, the rest of my post is 1000% accurate. All of those nominees were filibustered. They did not get an up and down vote as you say is required by the US Constitution. As I pointed out, you weren't complaining when the democrat party was doing it then so your lame attempts at saying "I hate it when democrats do it" fall on deaf ears

 

[canceled.2021.1]

Robert Bork got a vote...

42 Senators voting in favor and 58 voting against!

I don't have a problem with senators voting against a nominee, I do have a problem with them refusing to hold a vote.

I was incorrect about Bork. However, a filibuster is the same as refusing to hold a vote and you know it.

 

[Jarod]

I was incorrect about Bork. However, a filibuster is the same as refusing to hold a vote and you know it.

no, its not. When a party in charge of the House or Senate refuses to schedule a vote that is different than a group getting together and agreeing to abuse to rules to prevent a scheduled vote from taking place.

 

[Jarod]

As to Bork, I would have voted against him simply due to his compliancy in the Watergate Cover up.

 

[canceled.2021.1]

no, its not. When a party in charge of the House or Senate refuses to schedule a vote that is different than a group getting together and agreeing to abuse to rules to prevent a scheduled vote from taking place.

The end result is the same. You are splitting hairs over ways and means. You are embarrassing yourself.

 

[canceled.2021.1]

As to Bork, I would have voted against him simply due to his compliancy in the Watergate Cover up.

And the ones the democrat party filibustered?

It is all well and good for you to find religion on this issue today. You would have a bit more credibility if you can produce a thread of yours when the democrat party was doing this in 2007

I will understand if you can't and will humbly accept your concession