|
|
Post by vilepagan on Sept 24, 2020 9:51:21 GMT -8
I'm astounded every day that I'm still astounded every day by the blatant and utter hypocrisy of the left. Just the latest example: When an opening occurs on the U.S. Supreme Court, the Constitution requires that the president nominate a replacement and the Senate either confirm or reject that nominee. Yet the left is outraged that Donald Trump and the current Senate are proceeding to perform their constitutional duties. At the same time, the left is openly proposing eliminating the filibuster, granting statehood to Washington, DC and Puerto Rico to add four Democratic senators, to pack the Supreme Court with as many as six new liberal justices, to eliminate the electoral college, and to change the Senate makeup from two per state to population based. They object when the Constitution is followed while advocating the destruction of many of the tentpoles of our republic. What a bunch of assholes. Oh the calumny... The "left" is not outraged that trump and the Senate want to perform their Constitutional duties, but the Democrats are outraged that the Republicans stole a Supreme Court seat from them by refusing to do their Constitutional duties for Merrick Garland. Now they're saying they must rush through a new Justice....if only because they can. The pansy-assed Republicans are just worried that there may be consequences down the line. Worry not, there undoubtedly will be. BTW, acting within the law and changing the way we govern ourselves is not "advocating the destruction of many of the tentpoles of our republic", that's just crazy talk. |
|
Luca
Master Statesman
Posts: 1,317
|
Post by Luca on Sept 24, 2020 16:09:57 GMT -8
Of course they're outraged that the process is proceeding. There are any number of comments out there that demonstrate that.
And to be more accurate, the theoretical Garland seat was not "stolen". It was a Republican controlled Senate at the time and they wouldn't have confirmed the guy in an election year, anyway.
I wouldn't agree that, for example, fabricating a case for a presidential impeachment is acting within the law. That entire fiasco did nothing but distract for three years, which it's safe to conclude was the intent.
Did you seriously expect that after getting shafted like that that Donald Trump was going to say "Fair is fair, let's wait until after the election." One reaps what one sows, my friend....................................Luca
|
|
Credo
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 6,242
|
Post by Credo on Sept 24, 2020 16:32:54 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by ProfessorFate on Sept 24, 2020 21:43:06 GMT -8
After the new justice (Amy Coney Barrett?) is confirmed, and once the election has been decided, if Biden manages to win, maybe Clarence Thomas should resign and Barbara Lagoa should be nominated, and confirmed. Their heads would explode.
|
|
|
|
Post by vilepagan on Sept 25, 2020 3:03:49 GMT -8
Of course they're outraged that the process is proceeding. There are any number of comments out there that demonstrate that. And to be more accurate, the theoretical Garland seat was not "stolen". It was a Republican controlled Senate at the time and they wouldn't have confirmed the guy in an election year, anyway. You're the last person I would have expected to make a flimsy excuse. The Republicans had a duty to give the man a vote...they just didn't want to so they acted like spoiled children. As you said, one reaps what one sows, but you seem to think that only applies to the Democrats. I can assure you it doesn't. And no, I didn't expect the Republicans or trump to do what's fair and right regardless of whatever you think their motivation was...I fully expected them to come up with some bogus reasoning and I wasn't disappointed. I am slightly disappointed that you're carrying water for them...but what can you do. |
|
|
|
Post by Oakley on Sept 25, 2020 5:53:04 GMT -8
vilepagan has a severe case of denialism. Why are you so afraid of accepting facts? Maybe this will help. In 2016 the Senate had 52 Republicans and 48 Democrats. Two of those were Independents that caucused with the Dems. Now does it make sense to you?
|
|
SK80
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 7,379
|
Post by SK80 on Sept 25, 2020 5:58:19 GMT -8
To that blond chick who screams that she wishes she had been aborted, I would say, "it's never too late".  |
|
|
|
Post by vilepagan on Sept 25, 2020 6:21:12 GMT -8
vilepagan has a severe case of denialism. Why are you so afraid of accepting facts? Maybe this will help. In 2016 the Senate had 52 Republicans and 48 Democrats. Two of those were Independents that caucused with the Dems. Now does it make sense to you? You are the one denying facts. The Republicans denied Garland a vote that he should have gotten, regardless of what you think the vote would have produced. They refused to give him a vote because they wanted the next president to make a nomination and they made up some BS excuse to refuse to vote...now that the circumstances are reversed they're clamoring for an immediate vote. Rank hypocrisy. If they refuse to follow the will of the people there will be political consequences...there always are. Most Americans think winner of election should pick next Supreme Court justice: pollMost Americans said they think the winner of November’s presidential election should pick the successor to the late Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, according to a new poll.
Sixty-two percent of Americans said the vacancy left by Ginsburg, who died Friday, should be filled by whichever candidate wins the upcoming election, according to a Reuters-Ipsos poll released Sunday.thehill.com/homenews/senate/517306-most-americans-think-winner-of-election-should-pick-next-supreme-courtBut hey, don't let me dissuade you from plugging your ears and humming loudly so you don't hear what you don't like...it's what you guys do best. |
|
RSM789
Eminence Grise
Posts: 2,287
|
Post by RSM789 on Sept 25, 2020 7:03:17 GMT -8
...The Republicans had a duty to give the man a vote...they just didn't want to so they acted like spoiled children. . And yet now the Democrats are demanding that the Republicans NOT give a vote to Trumps nominee. The Democrats are demanding that the Republicans do exactly what you are saying they are mad about. How ironic your hypocrisy in not calling out the hypocrisy on both sides. |
|
RSM789
Eminence Grise
Posts: 2,287
|
Post by RSM789 on Sept 25, 2020 7:08:28 GMT -8
... The Republicans denied Garland a vote that he should have gotten,.. ...If they refuse to follow the will of the people there will be political consequences... Most Americans think winner of election should pick next Supreme Court justice: pollYou are arguing against yourself. You say you are mad that the Republicans denied Garland a vote & that they should follow the will of the people, and then claim the supposed will of the people is to deny that vote. Which one is it? You are getting hysterical and even more irrational than normal. Take a valium and a nap. |
|
SK80
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 7,379
|
Post by SK80 on Sept 25, 2020 7:35:52 GMT -8
You are arguing against yourself. You say you are mad that the Republicans denied Garland a vote & that they should follow the will of the people, and then claim the supposed will of the people is to deny that vote. Which one is it? You are getting hysterical and even more irrational than normal. Take a valium and a nap.Nap Nap for Val(ium)Pagan
 |
|
