Breaking: Justice Scalia has died

[jon_berzerk]

a tie is not unfair

it opinion of the lower court remains thats all

btw just because it is an even number does not necessarily mean a tie

perhaps an even number of jurists would end all or nothingness that has become expected of the court

So the GOP is playing politics with the courts. SHOCKED....SHOCKED!

Their platform should be one line:

PARTY OVER COUNTRY ALWAYS!

a big part of the country does not want a leftist on the court

the prezbo if he wants the seat filled

needs to pick one the senate will consent to

it is that simple

So, you want the Senate to vote, up or down then? Yes, or no?

how can i offer an opinion of such a question when the president has not nominated anyone

unlike you I am not a party loyalist

and will wait to see what I want my senators to do

But your obstructionist Leader has already said he will block anyone that the President nominates. PARTY OVER COUNTRY!

good cry me a river

you guys set the precedent for it

there has been many many times when the righties have said

wait until the tables turn

so put that in your pipe and smoke it

Schumer to fight new Bush high court picks

New York Sen. Charles E. Schumer, a powerful member of the Democratic leadership, said Friday the Senate should not confirm another U.S. Supreme Court nominee under President Bush “except in extraordinary circumstances.”

“We should reverse the presumption of confirmation,” Schumer told the American Constitution Society convention in Washington. “The Supreme Court is dangerously out of balance. We cannot afford to see Justice Stevens replaced by another Roberts, or Justice Ginsburg by another Alito.”


Schumer’s assertion comes as Democrats and liberal advocacy groups are increasingly complaining that the Supreme Court with Bush’s nominees – Chief Justice John Roberts and Associate Justice Samuel A. Alito – has moved quicker than expected to overturn legal precedents.

Schumer to fight new Bush high court picks

 

[Faun]

So the GOP is playing politics with the courts. SHOCKED....SHOCKED!

Their platform should be one line:

PARTY OVER COUNTRY ALWAYS!

a big part of the country does not want a leftist on the court

the prezbo if he wants the seat filled

needs to pick one the senate will consent to

it is that simple

So, you want the Senate to vote, up or down then? Yes, or no?

how can i offer an opinion of such a question when the president has not nominated anyone

unlike you I am not a party loyalist

and will wait to see what I want my senators to do

Republican Senators have already announced they have no intention of reviewing anyone Obama nominates. They have already declared they think the next president should handle this matter.

good as it should be cry

cry to chuck schumer if you dont like it

Why cry when there's an election coming up. This could very well influence the election in favor of Democrats.

 

[jon_berzerk]

a tie is not unfair

it opinion of the lower court remains thats all

btw just because it is an even number does not necessarily mean a tie

perhaps an even number of jurists would end all or nothingness that has become expected of the court

So the GOP is playing politics with the courts. SHOCKED....SHOCKED!

Their platform should be one line:

PARTY OVER COUNTRY ALWAYS!

a big part of the country does not want a leftist on the court

the prezbo if he wants the seat filled

needs to pick one the senate will consent to

it is that simple

Did obama win re election by 5 million votes??

did obama lose 5 million votes between election one and two

No. He lost 3.5M while GOP picked up 900,000.

the fact is he lost plenty of votes

and certainly not as the other poster indicated

i ran the numbers off the top my head

but again thanks for clearing it up

that obama lost votes and the right romney picked up votes

 

[Faun]

So the GOP is playing politics with the courts. SHOCKED....SHOCKED!

Their platform should be one line:

PARTY OVER COUNTRY ALWAYS!

a big part of the country does not want a leftist on the court

the prezbo if he wants the seat filled

needs to pick one the senate will consent to

it is that simple

So, you want the Senate to vote, up or down then? Yes, or no?

how can i offer an opinion of such a question when the president has not nominated anyone

unlike you I am not a party loyalist

and will wait to see what I want my senators to do

But your obstructionist Leader has already said he will block anyone that the President nominates. PARTY OVER COUNTRY!

good cry me a river

you guys set the precedent for it

there has been many many times when the righties have said

wait until the tables turn

so put that in your pipe and smoke it

Schumer to fight new Bush high court picks

New York Sen. Charles E. Schumer, a powerful member of the Democratic leadership, said Friday the Senate should not confirm another U.S. Supreme Court nominee under President Bush “except in extraordinary circumstances.”

“We should reverse the presumption of confirmation,” Schumer told the American Constitution Society convention in Washington. “The Supreme Court is dangerously out of balance. We cannot afford to see Justice Stevens replaced by another Roberts, or Justice Ginsburg by another Alito.”


Schumer’s assertion comes as Democrats and liberal advocacy groups are increasingly complaining that the Supreme Court with Bush’s nominees – Chief Justice John Roberts and Associate Justice Samuel A. Alito – has moved quicker than expected to overturn legal precedents.

Schumer to fight new Bush high court picks

And the right lambasted him for even suggesting it. Now the right is actually doing it.

 

[jon_berzerk]

This is funny .... in 2007, Chuck Schumer (NY-D) made a similar proposition as Republicans are making today ... check out how Republicans responded to this idea when made by a Democrat....

• "This is a strange tack for Schumer to take. Normally exalted members of the world's greatest deliberative body posture themselves as being fair and open-minded before questions of great weight are decided by them. But this time Schumer, who is diabolical but no fool, has shifted course and steered onto another tack. Why? Why would Schumer betray to the whole world that he simply will not give the nominee of the president of the United States to the Supreme Court a fair hearing?"

• "What he fails to understand is that he doesn’t have the right to filibuster judicial nominees. Or is it the case that his personal feelings or quest for power are more important than the Constitution."

• "I suppose that this piece of New York excrement would be declaring it one of the high lights of his career if it had been one or two LIBERAL pukes had been appointed to the SC. He is an (_*_)"

• "I would say this statement should be used by the Republicans to say Chuck Schumer should be taken off the committee. He has made up his mind on all nominees before they are even nominated."

• "But that’s the thing. These people have elevated the opposition to doing ANYTHING....and the only barrier is if they can get away with it. No constitution, no tradition, no fairness."

• "The Dems know that a HUGE portion of their base is either fanatical or ignorant and that they can get away with almost anything . The sheeple follow the Dems without question. They are so blind in their vengeance against Bush that they accept everything and anything the party does.The Dems leaders know this and take full advantage of their ignorant base. You surely don’t think the Dem leadership actually believes half of what they say do you ? I’m sure that behind closed doors the Dem leadership must laugh their asses off over how stupid their loyal followers actually are."

• "This is a terrible failing on Schumer's part. Away with this "confession" act as if that matters. He flat out screwed the pooch, and I for one don't accept this apology. The only penance I'll accept is his resignation."

• "Schmuckie’s latest hand-wringing over the Alito appointment leads me to think there’s another SCOTUS retirement in the works. He and his henchmen in the senate make me sick."

• "Why Schumer hasn’t been tried for Treason yet is beyond me..."

more on freerepublic.com

a big part of the country does not want a leftist on the court

the prezbo if he wants the seat filled

needs to pick one the senate will consent to

it is that simple

So, you want the Senate to vote, up or down then? Yes, or no?

how can i offer an opinion of such a question when the president has not nominated anyone

unlike you I am not a party loyalist

and will wait to see what I want my senators to do

Republican Senators have already announced they have no intention of reviewing anyone Obama nominates. They have already declared they think the next president should handle this matter.

good as it should be cry

cry to chuck schumer if you dont like it

Why cry when there's an election coming up. This could very well influence the election in favor of Democrats.

thankfully you did not pull out the crystal ball

might not favor the democrats either

obstruction sure did not hurt the democrats

when they did it during bushs last years

 

[jon_berzerk]

the SC does not take the majority of appeals they select some

so i do not see the unfairness of tie

the lower courts opinion remains valid

i hear what you are saying

i was just wondering about the full count of justices becoming an even number

You're right the court receives about 10,000 petitions for a hearing of which they select about a hundred. A tie is very unfair because when you're case is selected for a hearing, you expect that the case is going to be finally resolved after years in the court system. And after the waiting and the costs of taking the case to the Supreme Court for a final decision, there is none.

a tie is not unfair

it opinion of the lower court remains thats all

btw just because it is an even number does not necessarily mean a tie

perhaps an even number of jurists would end all or nothingness that has become expected of the court

So the GOP is playing politics with the courts. SHOCKED....SHOCKED!

Their platform should be one line:

PARTY OVER COUNTRY ALWAYS!

a big part of the country does not want a leftist on the court

the prezbo if he wants the seat filled

needs to pick one the senate will consent to

it is that simple

Anyone Obama appoints is going to be branded a leftest judge. Republicans have lost the most conservative member of the court and they are not going to settle for anything short a very conservative judge. The only way the Senate would accept a moderate would be if they felt a Democrat was going to win the presidency. However, it that was the case Obama wouldn't nominate one. Although there could be some negotiations between McConnnell and Obama, I don't see this seat being filled for at least a year.

If a democrat is elected president, and we have a republican Senate next year, the seat may sit vacant for years. There have been so many rulings by the court that have gone against conservatives, republicans may just see a less effective court as a good thing.

i believe that they should not settle for any nominee less then a

textuarlist why should they

as for the right losing get real the left has a good share of losses

at the supreme court as well

--LOL

 

[jon_berzerk]

You're right the court receives about 10,000 petitions for a hearing of which they select about a hundred. A tie is very unfair because when you're case is selected for a hearing, you expect that the case is going to be finally resolved after years in the court system. And after the waiting and the costs of taking the case to the Supreme Court for a final decision, there is none.

a tie is not unfair

it opinion of the lower court remains thats all

btw just because it is an even number does not necessarily mean a tie

perhaps an even number of jurists would end all or nothingness that has become expected of the court

So the GOP is playing politics with the courts. SHOCKED....SHOCKED!

Their platform should be one line:

PARTY OVER COUNTRY ALWAYS!

a big part of the country does not want a leftist on the court

the prezbo if he wants the seat filled

needs to pick one the senate will consent to

it is that simple

Anyone Obama appoints is going to be branded a leftest judge. Republicans have lost the most conservative member of the court and they are not going to settle for anything short a very conservative judge. The only way the Senate would accept a moderate would be if they felt a Democrat was going to win the presidency. However, it that was the case Obama wouldn't nominate one. Although there could be some negotiations between McConnnell and Obama, I don't see this seat being filled for at least a year.

If a democrat is elected president, and we have a republican Senate next year, the seat may sit vacant for years. There have been so many rulings by the court that have gone against conservatives, republicans may just see a less effective court as a good thing.

we need citizens united overturned

why is that

 

[EriktheRed]

When the Rude Pundit weighs in on this, I'll be sure to share his words with everyone here. Not only will it likely be much funnier, it'll be at least 10 times nastier.

As promised:

It doesn't matter if dead Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia loved his family and was loved by them. It doesn't fucking matter if Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was best buds with him. It doesn't fucking matter that he was smart or funny or that he had a great singing voice or that he could cook like your Italian grandma. It doesn't fucking matter if there were times that Scalia ruled on the side of liberals in free speech or warrantless search cases. None of that fucking matters. Because Antonin Scalia was a poison to the nation, a dick who was proud of how dickish he could be, and the thing that most of us on the left felt upon hearing that he was dead was relief and "Oh, thank fucking Christ." The only difference between you and the Rude Pundit is that you might have felt a little guilt after thinking that. As for the Rude Pundit? Fuck dancing on Scalia's grave. He's ready to have rough anal sex on it before the dirt even settles and then wipe himself off with the pages of a Bible.

The Rude Pundit: Dead Judge

 

[Faun]

This is funny .... in 2007, Chuck Schumer (NY-D) made a similar proposition as Republicans are making today ... check out how Republicans responded to this idea when made by a Democrat....

• "This is a strange tack for Schumer to take. Normally exalted members of the world's greatest deliberative body posture themselves as being fair and open-minded before questions of great weight are decided by them. But this time Schumer, who is diabolical but no fool, has shifted course and steered onto another tack. Why? Why would Schumer betray to the whole world that he simply will not give the nominee of the president of the United States to the Supreme Court a fair hearing?"

• "What he fails to understand is that he doesn’t have the right to filibuster judicial nominees. Or is it the case that his personal feelings or quest for power are more important than the Constitution."

• "I suppose that this piece of New York excrement would be declaring it one of the high lights of his career if it had been one or two LIBERAL pukes had been appointed to the SC. He is an (_*_)"

• "I would say this statement should be used by the Republicans to say Chuck Schumer should be taken off the committee. He has made up his mind on all nominees before they are even nominated."

• "But that’s the thing. These people have elevated the opposition to doing ANYTHING....and the only barrier is if they can get away with it. No constitution, no tradition, no fairness."

• "The Dems know that a HUGE portion of their base is either fanatical or ignorant and that they can get away with almost anything . The sheeple follow the Dems without question. They are so blind in their vengeance against Bush that they accept everything and anything the party does.The Dems leaders know this and take full advantage of their ignorant base. You surely don’t think the Dem leadership actually believes half of what they say do you ? I’m sure that behind closed doors the Dem leadership must laugh their asses off over how stupid their loyal followers actually are."

• "This is a terrible failing on Schumer's part. Away with this "confession" act as if that matters. He flat out screwed the pooch, and I for one don't accept this apology. The only penance I'll accept is his resignation."

• "Schmuckie’s latest hand-wringing over the Alito appointment leads me to think there’s another SCOTUS retirement in the works. He and his henchmen in the senate make me sick."

• "Why Schumer hasn’t been tried for Treason yet is beyond me..."

more on freerepublic.com

So, you want the Senate to vote, up or down then? Yes, or no?

how can i offer an opinion of such a question when the president has not nominated anyone

unlike you I am not a party loyalist

and will wait to see what I want my senators to do

Republican Senators have already announced they have no intention of reviewing anyone Obama nominates. They have already declared they think the next president should handle this matter.

good as it should be cry

cry to chuck schumer if you dont like it

Why cry when there's an election coming up. This could very well influence the election in favor of Democrats.

thankfully you did not pull out the crystal ball

might not favor the democrats either

obstruction sure did not hurt the democrats

when they did it during bushs last years

Obstructionism did not hurt Democrats??



You're fucking insane.

Tell me why Reid lost....?

That aside, I'm guessing most people who are in favor of Republicans spitting on the Constitution and obstructing Obama are gonna vote for the Republican anyway. Most people who think what Republicans are doing is wrong, are gonna vote for the Democrat anyway. Those in between will, as usual, decide the election. I can't imagine more of those people will be voting for those who are circumventing the Constitution for political gain.

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

3, 2…1…Here Come the Cries That Obama Had Scalia Killed
It took only moments for Justice Scalia's death to trigger the worst of conservative thinking on Twitter and Breitbart and

Hey, if Democrats managed to kill Andrew Breitbart and make it look like a heart attack (wink, wink) -- we could certainly do the same to Antonin Scalia.

As Reporters Dig into the Unusual Nature of Scalia's Death, Conspiracy Theorists Are Developing Bizarre Fantasies Michael Arria

 

[jon_berzerk]

This is funny .... in 2007, Chuck Schumer (NY-D) made a similar proposition as Republicans are making today ... check out how Republicans responded to this idea when made by a Democrat....

• "This is a strange tack for Schumer to take. Normally exalted members of the world's greatest deliberative body posture themselves as being fair and open-minded before questions of great weight are decided by them. But this time Schumer, who is diabolical but no fool, has shifted course and steered onto another tack. Why? Why would Schumer betray to the whole world that he simply will not give the nominee of the president of the United States to the Supreme Court a fair hearing?"

• "What he fails to understand is that he doesn’t have the right to filibuster judicial nominees. Or is it the case that his personal feelings or quest for power are more important than the Constitution."

• "I suppose that this piece of New York excrement would be declaring it one of the high lights of his career if it had been one or two LIBERAL pukes had been appointed to the SC. He is an (_*_)"

• "I would say this statement should be used by the Republicans to say Chuck Schumer should be taken off the committee. He has made up his mind on all nominees before they are even nominated."

• "But that’s the thing. These people have elevated the opposition to doing ANYTHING....and the only barrier is if they can get away with it. No constitution, no tradition, no fairness."

• "The Dems know that a HUGE portion of their base is either fanatical or ignorant and that they can get away with almost anything . The sheeple follow the Dems without question. They are so blind in their vengeance against Bush that they accept everything and anything the party does.The Dems leaders know this and take full advantage of their ignorant base. You surely don’t think the Dem leadership actually believes half of what they say do you ? I’m sure that behind closed doors the Dem leadership must laugh their asses off over how stupid their loyal followers actually are."

• "This is a terrible failing on Schumer's part. Away with this "confession" act as if that matters. He flat out screwed the pooch, and I for one don't accept this apology. The only penance I'll accept is his resignation."

• "Schmuckie’s latest hand-wringing over the Alito appointment leads me to think there’s another SCOTUS retirement in the works. He and his henchmen in the senate make me sick."

• "Why Schumer hasn’t been tried for Treason yet is beyond me..."

more on freerepublic.com

how can i offer an opinion of such a question when the president has not nominated anyone

unlike you I am not a party loyalist

and will wait to see what I want my senators to do

Republican Senators have already announced they have no intention of reviewing anyone Obama nominates. They have already declared they think the next president should handle this matter.

good as it should be cry

cry to chuck schumer if you dont like it

Why cry when there's an election coming up. This could very well influence the election in favor of Democrats.

thankfully you did not pull out the crystal ball

might not favor the democrats either

obstruction sure did not hurt the democrats

when they did it during bushs last years

Obstructionism did not hurt Democrats??



You're fucking insane.

Tell me why Reid lost....?

That aside, I'm guessing most people who are in favor of Republicans spitting on the Constitution and obstructing Obama are gonna vote for the Republican anyway. Most people who think what Republicans are doing is wrong, are gonna vote for the Democrat anyway. Those in between will, as usual, decide the election. I can't imagine more of those people will be voting for those who are circumventing the Constitution for political gain.

--LOL

in 2008 the dems had the house senate and presidency

--LOL

so it didnt hurt them too bad

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

Bill Kristol's Weekly Standard is .....skeptical of foul play:

 

[EriktheRed]

This is funny .... in 2007, Chuck Schumer (NY-D) made a similar proposition as Republicans are making today ... check out how Republicans responded to this idea when made by a Democrat....

• "This is a strange tack for Schumer to take. Normally exalted members of the world's greatest deliberative body posture themselves as being fair and open-minded before questions of great weight are decided by them. But this time Schumer, who is diabolical but no fool, has shifted course and steered onto another tack. Why? Why would Schumer betray to the whole world that he simply will not give the nominee of the president of the United States to the Supreme Court a fair hearing?"

• "What he fails to understand is that he doesn’t have the right to filibuster judicial nominees. Or is it the case that his personal feelings or quest for power are more important than the Constitution."

• "I suppose that this piece of New York excrement would be declaring it one of the high lights of his career if it had been one or two LIBERAL pukes had been appointed to the SC. He is an (_*_)"

• "I would say this statement should be used by the Republicans to say Chuck Schumer should be taken off the committee. He has made up his mind on all nominees before they are even nominated."

• "But that’s the thing. These people have elevated the opposition to doing ANYTHING....and the only barrier is if they can get away with it. No constitution, no tradition, no fairness."

• "The Dems know that a HUGE portion of their base is either fanatical or ignorant and that they can get away with almost anything . The sheeple follow the Dems without question. They are so blind in their vengeance against Bush that they accept everything and anything the party does.The Dems leaders know this and take full advantage of their ignorant base. You surely don’t think the Dem leadership actually believes half of what they say do you ? I’m sure that behind closed doors the Dem leadership must laugh their asses off over how stupid their loyal followers actually are."

• "This is a terrible failing on Schumer's part. Away with this "confession" act as if that matters. He flat out screwed the pooch, and I for one don't accept this apology. The only penance I'll accept is his resignation."

• "Schmuckie’s latest hand-wringing over the Alito appointment leads me to think there’s another SCOTUS retirement in the works. He and his henchmen in the senate make me sick."

• "Why Schumer hasn’t been tried for Treason yet is beyond me..."

more on freerepublic.com

Republican Senators have already announced they have no intention of reviewing anyone Obama nominates. They have already declared they think the next president should handle this matter.

good as it should be cry

cry to chuck schumer if you dont like it

Why cry when there's an election coming up. This could very well influence the election in favor of Democrats.

thankfully you did not pull out the crystal ball

might not favor the democrats either

obstruction sure did not hurt the democrats

when they did it during bushs last years

Obstructionism did not hurt Democrats??



You're fucking insane.

Tell me why Reid lost....?

That aside, I'm guessing most people who are in favor of Republicans spitting on the Constitution and obstructing Obama are gonna vote for the Republican anyway. Most people who think what Republicans are doing is wrong, are gonna vote for the Democrat anyway. Those in between will, as usual, decide the election. I can't imagine more of those people will be voting for those who are circumventing the Constitution for political gain.

--LOL

in 2008 the dems had the house senate and presidency

--LOL

so it didnt hurt them too bad

He's right, btw.

"Obstruction" hurt the Dems in 2002, when Shrub's popularity was at its highest. When his numbers went into the toilet during his second term, it was just fine for them to be the opposition.

Sure don't see President Obama having the shitty poll numbers of his predecessor, though.

 

[Faun]

This is funny .... in 2007, Chuck Schumer (NY-D) made a similar proposition as Republicans are making today ... check out how Republicans responded to this idea when made by a Democrat....

• "This is a strange tack for Schumer to take. Normally exalted members of the world's greatest deliberative body posture themselves as being fair and open-minded before questions of great weight are decided by them. But this time Schumer, who is diabolical but no fool, has shifted course and steered onto another tack. Why? Why would Schumer betray to the whole world that he simply will not give the nominee of the president of the United States to the Supreme Court a fair hearing?"

• "What he fails to understand is that he doesn’t have the right to filibuster judicial nominees. Or is it the case that his personal feelings or quest for power are more important than the Constitution."

• "I suppose that this piece of New York excrement would be declaring it one of the high lights of his career if it had been one or two LIBERAL pukes had been appointed to the SC. He is an (_*_)"

• "I would say this statement should be used by the Republicans to say Chuck Schumer should be taken off the committee. He has made up his mind on all nominees before they are even nominated."

• "But that’s the thing. These people have elevated the opposition to doing ANYTHING....and the only barrier is if they can get away with it. No constitution, no tradition, no fairness."

• "The Dems know that a HUGE portion of their base is either fanatical or ignorant and that they can get away with almost anything . The sheeple follow the Dems without question. They are so blind in their vengeance against Bush that they accept everything and anything the party does.The Dems leaders know this and take full advantage of their ignorant base. You surely don’t think the Dem leadership actually believes half of what they say do you ? I’m sure that behind closed doors the Dem leadership must laugh their asses off over how stupid their loyal followers actually are."

• "This is a terrible failing on Schumer's part. Away with this "confession" act as if that matters. He flat out screwed the pooch, and I for one don't accept this apology. The only penance I'll accept is his resignation."

• "Schmuckie’s latest hand-wringing over the Alito appointment leads me to think there’s another SCOTUS retirement in the works. He and his henchmen in the senate make me sick."

• "Why Schumer hasn’t been tried for Treason yet is beyond me..."

more on freerepublic.com

Republican Senators have already announced they have no intention of reviewing anyone Obama nominates. They have already declared they think the next president should handle this matter.

good as it should be cry

cry to chuck schumer if you dont like it

Why cry when there's an election coming up. This could very well influence the election in favor of Democrats.

thankfully you did not pull out the crystal ball

might not favor the democrats either

obstruction sure did not hurt the democrats

when they did it during bushs last years

Obstructionism did not hurt Democrats??



You're fucking insane.

Tell me why Reid lost....?

That aside, I'm guessing most people who are in favor of Republicans spitting on the Constitution and obstructing Obama are gonna vote for the Republican anyway. Most people who think what Republicans are doing is wrong, are gonna vote for the Democrat anyway. Those in between will, as usual, decide the election. I can't imagine more of those people will be voting for those who are circumventing the Constitution for political gain.

--LOL

in 2008 the dems had the house senate and presidency

--LOL

so it didnt hurt them too bad

Again, insanely stupid. Democrats won big in 2008 because Bush drove the economy 6 feet under the ground.

And you didn't answer my question ... why did Reid lose the Senate in 2014?

Do you want me to find some posts on here by conservatives from back then to jog your memory?

 

[jon_berzerk]

This is funny .... in 2007, Chuck Schumer (NY-D) made a similar proposition as Republicans are making today ... check out how Republicans responded to this idea when made by a Democrat....

• "This is a strange tack for Schumer to take. Normally exalted members of the world's greatest deliberative body posture themselves as being fair and open-minded before questions of great weight are decided by them. But this time Schumer, who is diabolical but no fool, has shifted course and steered onto another tack. Why? Why would Schumer betray to the whole world that he simply will not give the nominee of the president of the United States to the Supreme Court a fair hearing?"

• "What he fails to understand is that he doesn’t have the right to filibuster judicial nominees. Or is it the case that his personal feelings or quest for power are more important than the Constitution."

• "I suppose that this piece of New York excrement would be declaring it one of the high lights of his career if it had been one or two LIBERAL pukes had been appointed to the SC. He is an (_*_)"

• "I would say this statement should be used by the Republicans to say Chuck Schumer should be taken off the committee. He has made up his mind on all nominees before they are even nominated."

• "But that’s the thing. These people have elevated the opposition to doing ANYTHING....and the only barrier is if they can get away with it. No constitution, no tradition, no fairness."

• "The Dems know that a HUGE portion of their base is either fanatical or ignorant and that they can get away with almost anything . The sheeple follow the Dems without question. They are so blind in their vengeance against Bush that they accept everything and anything the party does.The Dems leaders know this and take full advantage of their ignorant base. You surely don’t think the Dem leadership actually believes half of what they say do you ? I’m sure that behind closed doors the Dem leadership must laugh their asses off over how stupid their loyal followers actually are."

• "This is a terrible failing on Schumer's part. Away with this "confession" act as if that matters. He flat out screwed the pooch, and I for one don't accept this apology. The only penance I'll accept is his resignation."

• "Schmuckie’s latest hand-wringing over the Alito appointment leads me to think there’s another SCOTUS retirement in the works. He and his henchmen in the senate make me sick."

• "Why Schumer hasn’t been tried for Treason yet is beyond me..."

more on freerepublic.com

good as it should be cry

cry to chuck schumer if you dont like it

Why cry when there's an election coming up. This could very well influence the election in favor of Democrats.

thankfully you did not pull out the crystal ball

might not favor the democrats either

obstruction sure did not hurt the democrats

when they did it during bushs last years

Obstructionism did not hurt Democrats??



You're fucking insane.

Tell me why Reid lost....?

That aside, I'm guessing most people who are in favor of Republicans spitting on the Constitution and obstructing Obama are gonna vote for the Republican anyway. Most people who think what Republicans are doing is wrong, are gonna vote for the Democrat anyway. Those in between will, as usual, decide the election. I can't imagine more of those people will be voting for those who are circumventing the Constitution for political gain.

--LOL

in 2008 the dems had the house senate and presidency

--LOL

so it didnt hurt them too bad

He's right, btw.

"Obstruction" hurt the Dems in 2002, when Shrub's popularity was at its highest. When his numbers went into the toilet during his second term, it was just fine for them to be the opposition.

Sure don't see President Obama having the shitty poll numbers of his predecessor, though.

it is in the marketing

it will be fine

 

[jon_berzerk]

This is funny .... in 2007, Chuck Schumer (NY-D) made a similar proposition as Republicans are making today ... check out how Republicans responded to this idea when made by a Democrat....

• "This is a strange tack for Schumer to take. Normally exalted members of the world's greatest deliberative body posture themselves as being fair and open-minded before questions of great weight are decided by them. But this time Schumer, who is diabolical but no fool, has shifted course and steered onto another tack. Why? Why would Schumer betray to the whole world that he simply will not give the nominee of the president of the United States to the Supreme Court a fair hearing?"

• "What he fails to understand is that he doesn’t have the right to filibuster judicial nominees. Or is it the case that his personal feelings or quest for power are more important than the Constitution."

• "I suppose that this piece of New York excrement would be declaring it one of the high lights of his career if it had been one or two LIBERAL pukes had been appointed to the SC. He is an (_*_)"

• "I would say this statement should be used by the Republicans to say Chuck Schumer should be taken off the committee. He has made up his mind on all nominees before they are even nominated."

• "But that’s the thing. These people have elevated the opposition to doing ANYTHING....and the only barrier is if they can get away with it. No constitution, no tradition, no fairness."

• "The Dems know that a HUGE portion of their base is either fanatical or ignorant and that they can get away with almost anything . The sheeple follow the Dems without question. They are so blind in their vengeance against Bush that they accept everything and anything the party does.The Dems leaders know this and take full advantage of their ignorant base. You surely don’t think the Dem leadership actually believes half of what they say do you ? I’m sure that behind closed doors the Dem leadership must laugh their asses off over how stupid their loyal followers actually are."

• "This is a terrible failing on Schumer's part. Away with this "confession" act as if that matters. He flat out screwed the pooch, and I for one don't accept this apology. The only penance I'll accept is his resignation."

• "Schmuckie’s latest hand-wringing over the Alito appointment leads me to think there’s another SCOTUS retirement in the works. He and his henchmen in the senate make me sick."

• "Why Schumer hasn’t been tried for Treason yet is beyond me..."

more on freerepublic.com

good as it should be cry

cry to chuck schumer if you dont like it

Why cry when there's an election coming up. This could very well influence the election in favor of Democrats.

thankfully you did not pull out the crystal ball

might not favor the democrats either

obstruction sure did not hurt the democrats

when they did it during bushs last years

Obstructionism did not hurt Democrats??



You're fucking insane.

Tell me why Reid lost....?

That aside, I'm guessing most people who are in favor of Republicans spitting on the Constitution and obstructing Obama are gonna vote for the Republican anyway. Most people who think what Republicans are doing is wrong, are gonna vote for the Democrat anyway. Those in between will, as usual, decide the election. I can't imagine more of those people will be voting for those who are circumventing the Constitution for political gain.

--LOL

in 2008 the dems had the house senate and presidency

--LOL

so it didnt hurt them too bad

Again, insanely stupid. Democrats won big in 2008 because Bush drove the economy 6 feet under the ground.

And you didn't answer my question ... why did Reid lose the Senate in 2014?

Do you want me to find some posts on here by conservatives from back then to jog your memory?

not is not great out there now

it will be fine

but if it isnt what do you care

 

[Faun]

Why cry when there's an election coming up. This could very well influence the election in favor of Democrats.

thankfully you did not pull out the crystal ball

might not favor the democrats either

obstruction sure did not hurt the democrats

when they did it during bushs last years

Obstructionism did not hurt Democrats??



You're fucking insane.

Tell me why Reid lost....?

That aside, I'm guessing most people who are in favor of Republicans spitting on the Constitution and obstructing Obama are gonna vote for the Republican anyway. Most people who think what Republicans are doing is wrong, are gonna vote for the Democrat anyway. Those in between will, as usual, decide the election. I can't imagine more of those people will be voting for those who are circumventing the Constitution for political gain.

--LOL

in 2008 the dems had the house senate and presidency

--LOL

so it didnt hurt them too bad

Again, insanely stupid. Democrats won big in 2008 because Bush drove the economy 6 feet under the ground.

And you didn't answer my question ... why did Reid lose the Senate in 2014?

Do you want me to find some posts on here by conservatives from back then to jog your memory?

not is not great out there now

it will be fine

but if it isnt what do you care

Nothing like it was 7 years ago. Nowhere near like it.

And still no answer to my question ... why did Harry Reid lose the Senate in 2014?

 

[EriktheRed]

This is funny .... in 2007, Chuck Schumer (NY-D) made a similar proposition as Republicans are making today ... check out how Republicans responded to this idea when made by a Democrat....

• "This is a strange tack for Schumer to take. Normally exalted members of the world's greatest deliberative body posture themselves as being fair and open-minded before questions of great weight are decided by them. But this time Schumer, who is diabolical but no fool, has shifted course and steered onto another tack. Why? Why would Schumer betray to the whole world that he simply will not give the nominee of the president of the United States to the Supreme Court a fair hearing?"

• "What he fails to understand is that he doesn’t have the right to filibuster judicial nominees. Or is it the case that his personal feelings or quest for power are more important than the Constitution."

• "I suppose that this piece of New York excrement would be declaring it one of the high lights of his career if it had been one or two LIBERAL pukes had been appointed to the SC. He is an (_*_)"

• "I would say this statement should be used by the Republicans to say Chuck Schumer should be taken off the committee. He has made up his mind on all nominees before they are even nominated."

• "But that’s the thing. These people have elevated the opposition to doing ANYTHING....and the only barrier is if they can get away with it. No constitution, no tradition, no fairness."

• "The Dems know that a HUGE portion of their base is either fanatical or ignorant and that they can get away with almost anything . The sheeple follow the Dems without question. They are so blind in their vengeance against Bush that they accept everything and anything the party does.The Dems leaders know this and take full advantage of their ignorant base. You surely don’t think the Dem leadership actually believes half of what they say do you ? I’m sure that behind closed doors the Dem leadership must laugh their asses off over how stupid their loyal followers actually are."

• "This is a terrible failing on Schumer's part. Away with this "confession" act as if that matters. He flat out screwed the pooch, and I for one don't accept this apology. The only penance I'll accept is his resignation."

• "Schmuckie’s latest hand-wringing over the Alito appointment leads me to think there’s another SCOTUS retirement in the works. He and his henchmen in the senate make me sick."

• "Why Schumer hasn’t been tried for Treason yet is beyond me..."

more on freerepublic.com

good as it should be cry

cry to chuck schumer if you dont like it

Why cry when there's an election coming up. This could very well influence the election in favor of Democrats.

thankfully you did not pull out the crystal ball

might not favor the democrats either

obstruction sure did not hurt the democrats

when they did it during bushs last years

Obstructionism did not hurt Democrats??



You're fucking insane.

Tell me why Reid lost....?

That aside, I'm guessing most people who are in favor of Republicans spitting on the Constitution and obstructing Obama are gonna vote for the Republican anyway. Most people who think what Republicans are doing is wrong, are gonna vote for the Democrat anyway. Those in between will, as usual, decide the election. I can't imagine more of those people will be voting for those who are circumventing the Constitution for political gain.

--LOL

in 2008 the dems had the house senate and presidency

--LOL

so it didnt hurt them too bad

Again, insanely stupid. Democrats won big in 2008 because Bush drove the economy 6 feet under the ground.

And you didn't answer my question ... why did Reid lose the Senate in 2014?

Do you want me to find some posts on here by conservatives from back then to jog your memory?

Reid lost the Senate in 2014 because the GOP has done a much better job of getting their base motivated to vote in every election, not just Presidential ones. Plus, they managed to get some of their loopier candidates (like that nutbag in Iowa) to suppress some of their loopiness after winning their primaries. That's a lesson they learned after the 2010 elections, when they could have gotten the Senate then, but a few of their wingier wingnuts blew it for them.

 

[jon_berzerk]

thankfully you did not pull out the crystal ball

might not favor the democrats either

obstruction sure did not hurt the democrats

when they did it during bushs last years

Obstructionism did not hurt Democrats??



You're fucking insane.

Tell me why Reid lost....?

That aside, I'm guessing most people who are in favor of Republicans spitting on the Constitution and obstructing Obama are gonna vote for the Republican anyway. Most people who think what Republicans are doing is wrong, are gonna vote for the Democrat anyway. Those in between will, as usual, decide the election. I can't imagine more of those people will be voting for those who are circumventing the Constitution for political gain.

--LOL

in 2008 the dems had the house senate and presidency

--LOL

so it didnt hurt them too bad

Again, insanely stupid. Democrats won big in 2008 because Bush drove the economy 6 feet under the ground.

And you didn't answer my question ... why did Reid lose the Senate in 2014?

Do you want me to find some posts on here by conservatives from back then to jog your memory?

not is not great out there now

it will be fine

but if it isnt what do you care

Nothing like it was 7 years ago. Nowhere near like it.

And still no answer to my question ... why did Harry Reid lose the Senate in 2014?

yeah sure

ever watch that stock market

taking 1000 point swings

how many trillions in debt

how much simply printed dollars are out right now

price of insurance through the roof

the last thing the country might want is another leftist on the final bench

 

[jon_berzerk]

Why cry when there's an election coming up. This could very well influence the election in favor of Democrats.

thankfully you did not pull out the crystal ball

might not favor the democrats either

obstruction sure did not hurt the democrats

when they did it during bushs last years

Obstructionism did not hurt Democrats??



You're fucking insane.

Tell me why Reid lost....?

That aside, I'm guessing most people who are in favor of Republicans spitting on the Constitution and obstructing Obama are gonna vote for the Republican anyway. Most people who think what Republicans are doing is wrong, are gonna vote for the Democrat anyway. Those in between will, as usual, decide the election. I can't imagine more of those people will be voting for those who are circumventing the Constitution for political gain.

--LOL

in 2008 the dems had the house senate and presidency

--LOL

so it didnt hurt them too bad

Again, insanely stupid. Democrats won big in 2008 because Bush drove the economy 6 feet under the ground.

And you didn't answer my question ... why did Reid lose the Senate in 2014?

Do you want me to find some posts on here by conservatives from back then to jog your memory?

Reid lost the Senate in 2014 because the GOP has done a much better job of getting their base motivated to vote in every election, not just Presidential ones. Plus, they managed to get some of their loopier candidates (like that nutbag in Iowa) to suppress some of their loopiness after winning their primaries. That's a lesson they learned after the 2010 elections, when they could have gotten the Senate then, but a few of their wingier wingnuts blew it for them.

check it out at the state and local level