GOP Dares Call Gorsuch Filibuster Unprecedented—While Ignoring Their Blockade Of Garland

[Nosmo King]

A mass amnesia has fallen upon Republican senators.

They seem to have forgotten about that time they refused to give President Obama’s nominee for the Supreme Court an up-or-down vote – or even a hearing – last year. Now they are claiming that Democrats are the norm-breakers for threatening to filibuster President Trump’s own Supreme Court nominee, Neil Gorsuch.

Republicans are in a full-scale pressure campaign to convince 41 Democrats not to vote against invoking “cloture” on the debate over Gorsuch, which would prevent him from moving to a floor vote, where he would need only a simple majority to be confirmed.

Welcome to politics newbie!

Wait until the GOP uses the nuclear option, then the left will be screaming "This is unprecedented!!!"

Impose the nuclear option at your own peril. If the senate GOP invokes the nuclear option, there will be nothing but hard core partisans nominated to the bench. And that would make the SCOTUS another political arm of government.

We've seen how well partisanship works. From creating fiscal crisis's then shutting down the government out of a fit of political pique to dropping the ball on repeal and replace. Would you want to see partisanship ruling from the bench at the Supreme Court?

 

[easyt65]

"Impose the nuclear option at your own peril. If the senate GOP invokes the nuclear option, there will be nothing but hard core partisans nominated to the bench. And that would make the SCOTUS another political arm of government.

I truly mean no disrespect when I say this, BUT that is one of the dumbest things I have heard in this argument.

When Gorsuch was 1st nominated both Republicans AND DEMOCRATS praised this man.

The liberal media declared him to be one of the most fitting candidates that could have been nominated.

Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (N.Y.) - the asshole now wanting to obstruct his up or down vote, Democratic Whip Dick Durbin (Ill.), and ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee Patrick Leahy (Vt.) voted for Gorsuch as a Circuit Court Judge in 2006.

The recent news / polls show the majority of Americans want him as a USSC Judge, AND only 39 hard-core butt-hurt Democrats who are upset at the loss of the recent election - a few of them who have praised Gorsuch - plan on participating in a filibuster...meaning EVEN THE MAJORITY OF DEMOCRATS LIKE THIS MAN.
.
.
.
So you are saying that 39 butthurt Democrats not getting the filibuster / Obstructionist outcome THEY want - that the majority of their own party does NOT want - is fair justification for trying to ram the most hard-core partisan Judges into the USSC in the future as 'payback' for a sleight to only THEM (39 Democrats who are only doing this for partisan hatred and not what is best for the country)...especially when the Democrats were so passionate about ensuring 'ALL' judges get an up or down vote from now on that they created the 'Reid rule'?

Again, that is just DUMB!

(BTW, are you saying Sotomayor, who once said she believed in empathy on the bench outweighing the law (paraphrased) and who believes in liberal legislation from the bench (IMO) was NOT a partisan appointment?)

 

[PredFan]

A mass amnesia has fallen upon Republican senators.

They seem to have forgotten about that time they refused to give President Obama’s nominee for the Supreme Court an up-or-down vote – or even a hearing – last year. Now they are claiming that Democrats are the norm-breakers for threatening to filibuster President Trump’s own Supreme Court nominee, Neil Gorsuch.

Republicans are in a full-scale pressure campaign to convince 41 Democrats not to vote against invoking “cloture” on the debate over Gorsuch, which would prevent him from moving to a floor vote, where he would need only a simple majority to be confirmed.

Welcome to politics newbie!

Wait until the GOP uses the nuclear option, then the left will be screaming "This is unprecedented!!!"

Impose the nuclear option at your own peril. If the senate GOP invokes the nuclear option, there will be nothing but hard core partisans nominated to the bench. And that would make the SCOTUS another political arm of government.

We've seen how well partisanship works. From creating fiscal crisis's then shutting down the government out of a fit of political pique to dropping the ball on repeal and replace. Would you want to see partisanship ruling from the bench at the Supreme Court?

A hard core politician on the left legislates from the bench, ignoring the Constitution. A hard core politician from the right admires and believes in the Constitution, which is the actual job of the SCOTUS. I'm perfectly fine with putting people on the SCOTUS who will stick to the Constitution.

 

[PredFan]

A mass amnesia has fallen upon Republican senators.

They seem to have forgotten about that time they refused to give President Obama’s nominee for the Supreme Court an up-or-down vote – or even a hearing – last year. Now they are claiming that Democrats are the norm-breakers for threatening to filibuster President Trump’s own Supreme Court nominee, Neil Gorsuch.

Republicans are in a full-scale pressure campaign to convince 41 Democrats not to vote against invoking “cloture” on the debate over Gorsuch, which would prevent him from moving to a floor vote, where he would need only a simple majority to be confirmed.

Welcome to politics newbie!

Wait until the GOP uses the nuclear option, then the left will be screaming "This is unprecedented!!!"

It is, skumbucket

Only for a scotus pick. It's been used by the left a number of times. Got it moron?

 

[whitehall]

Ummm the republican block of lame duck Obama's appointment wasn't a filibuster?

 

[easyt65]

A hard core politician on the left legislates from the bench, ignoring the Constitution. A hard core politician from the right admires and believes in the Constitution, which is the actual job of the SCOTUS. I'm perfectly fine with putting people on the SCOTUS who will stick to the Constitution.

"Winner, winner, chicken dinner!"

 

[Nosmo King]

"Impose the nuclear option at your own peril. If the senate GOP invokes the nuclear option, there will be nothing but hard core partisans nominated to the bench. And that would make the SCOTUS another political arm of government.

I truly mean no disrespect when I say this, BUT that is one of the dumbest things I have heard in this argument.

When Gorsuch was 1st nominated both Republicans AND DEMOCRATS praised this man.

The liberal media declared him to be one of the most fitting candidates that could have been nominated.

Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (N.Y.) - the asshole now wanting to obstruct his up or down vote, Democratic Whip Dick Durbin (Ill.), and ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee Patrick Leahy (Vt.) voted for Gorsuch as a Circuit Court Judge in 2006.

The recent news / polls show the majority of Americans want him as a USSC Judge, AND only 39 hard-core butt-hurt Democrats who are upset at the loss of the recent election - a few of them who have praised Gorsuch - plan on participating in a filibuster...meaning EVEN THE MAJORITY OF DEMOCRATS LIKE THIS MAN.
.
.
.
So you are saying that 39 butthurt Democrats not getting the filibuster / Obstructionist outcome THEY want - that the majority of their own party does NOT want - is fair justification for trying to ram the most hard-core partisan Judges into the USSC in the future as 'payback' for a sleight to only THEM (39 Democrats who are only doing this for partisan hatred and not what is best for the country)...especially when the Democrats were so passionate about ensuring 'ALL' judges get an up or down vote from now on that they created the 'Reid rule'?

Again, that is just DUMB!

I'm saying that given the GOP blockade of Merrick Garland (does a President serve a four year term or a three year term?), invoking the nuclear option would assure that no one but rabid partisans will ever be nominated to the bench again.

All that needs to happen is the stars align, one party holds both houses of congress and the White House and voila! The Supreme Court becomes an extension of the ruling party.

gorsuch may be the right man for the job. But his path is wrought with the obstructionism of the GOP this time last year.

 

[BULLDOG]

For the most part, appointing a Justice when there is a vacancy on the court is the norm

There's a vacancy...

Been one for more than a year.

I see your point, we should do something today.

We've gone a year. Why get in a rush now?

 

[easyt65]

Ummm the republican block of lame duck Obama's appointment wasn't a filibuster?

It was a block of an up or down vote. With the Reid Rule the Democrats made a great move to eliminate the partisan bullshit that goes on in Washington, even though I still believe they did so to shame the GOP and to ensure THEIR candidates got an up or down vote ,not 'ALL' candidates (which is proven by their actions now, IMO).

If they truly believed in the 'up or down for ALL judges they would not be falling so quickly to the 'tit for tat' play, giving up so quickly on what the Reid rule represented (or was symbolically supposed to be representing). They would condemn the GOP then give Gorsuch the up or down vote THEY - Democrats - declared ALL judges should have....especially if only 39 Democrats are interested in blocking this man for partisan reasons.

 

[Nosmo King]

A mass amnesia has fallen upon Republican senators.

They seem to have forgotten about that time they refused to give President Obama’s nominee for the Supreme Court an up-or-down vote – or even a hearing – last year. Now they are claiming that Democrats are the norm-breakers for threatening to filibuster President Trump’s own Supreme Court nominee, Neil Gorsuch.

Republicans are in a full-scale pressure campaign to convince 41 Democrats not to vote against invoking “cloture” on the debate over Gorsuch, which would prevent him from moving to a floor vote, where he would need only a simple majority to be confirmed.

Welcome to politics newbie!

Wait until the GOP uses the nuclear option, then the left will be screaming "This is unprecedented!!!"

Impose the nuclear option at your own peril. If the senate GOP invokes the nuclear option, there will be nothing but hard core partisans nominated to the bench. And that would make the SCOTUS another political arm of government.

We've seen how well partisanship works. From creating fiscal crisis's then shutting down the government out of a fit of political pique to dropping the ball on repeal and replace. Would you want to see partisanship ruling from the bench at the Supreme Court?

A hard core politician on the left legislates from the bench, ignoring the Constitution. A hard core politician from the right admires and believes in the Constitution, which is the actual job of the SCOTUS. I'm perfectly fine with putting people on the SCOTUS who will stick to the Constitution.

Really? Does the constitution say that money is speech? The constitution was written when there were no corporations, very few banks and slavery was legal. The nation has changed. The constitution is as elastic as it should be to accommodate such changes.

 

[easyt65]

I'm saying that given the GOP blockade of Merrick Garland (does a President serve a four year term or a three year term?), invoking the nuclear option would assure that no one but rabid partisans will ever be nominated to the bench again.

All that needs to happen is the stars align, one party holds both houses of congress and the White House and voila! The Supreme Court becomes an extension of the ruling party.

gorsuch may be the right man for the job. But his path is wrought with the obstructionism of the GOP this time last year.

 

[Auld Phart]

For the most part, appointing a Justice when there is a vacancy on the court is the norm

There's a vacancy...

Been one for more than a year.

I see your point, we should do something today.

We've gone a year. Why get in a rush now?

There's a rush?

 

[BULLDOG]

Nobody forgot anything. Garland never got a strait up or down vote, did he?

No he did not...and the Democrats were so pissed and so determined to make sure no one ever got treated that way again Harry Reid created the 'Reid Rule'....until now when the butt-hurt snowflakes are pissed about the results of the election and don't give a damn about the Reid Rule or that judges get an up or down vote anymore. They just want to make sure that happens when THEY are in power.

So why did the right set that precedent? If you didn't want it to be followed, why did you set it?

Why did Reid and the Democrats create the 'Reid Rule' if they felt so passionately about EVERY Judge getting an up or down vote? The answer is they NEVER meant for EVERY judge to get an up or down vote - only THEIRS when they are in power, as their actions now show. HYPOCRITS and Partisan Political Theater Actors!

We've gone a year with a vacancy on the court. Is there any reason why we even need to fill it now?

 

[Hutch Starskey]

A mass amnesia has fallen upon Republican senators.

They seem to have forgotten about that time they refused to give President Obama’s nominee for the Supreme Court an up-or-down vote – or even a hearing – last year. Now they are claiming that Democrats are the norm-breakers for threatening to filibuster President Trump’s own Supreme Court nominee, Neil Gorsuch.

Republicans are in a full-scale pressure campaign to convince 41 Democrats not to vote against invoking “cloture” on the debate over Gorsuch, which would prevent him from moving to a floor vote, where he would need only a simple majority to be confirmed.

Welcome to politics newbie!

Wait until the GOP uses the nuclear option, then the left will be screaming "This is unprecedented!!!"

It would be unprecedented.

 

[saveliberty]

We've gone a year. Why get in a rush now?

What rush? We've had hearings and everything now. Just a vote to go.

 

[Avatar4321]

Out of curiosity, how many supreme court nominees have received a filibuster?

 

[Hutch Starskey]

And the Democrats who are now threatening a filibuster have forgotten they were the ones demanding the straight up or down vote for Garland. Welcome to the wonderful world of politics.

Garland never even had a hearing.

 

[easyt65]

I'm saying that given the GOP blockade of Merrick Garland (does a President serve a four year term or a three year term?), invoking the nuclear option would assure that no one but rabid partisans will ever be nominated to the bench again.

Sorry, I just don't buy that argument. Gorsuch is not a 'rabid partisan' nominee. He is one that is embraced by almost EVERYONE on both sides of the aisle except for 39 rabidly partisan Democrats who are butthurt about losing the election and are trying to do this because they have publicly dedicated the next 4 years of their publicly elected lives / terms to doing nothing but oppose everything this administration does for the sake of their own party rather than the good of the nation.

Everyone knows that - even their fellow Democrats who won't follow them in this filibuster. ONLY 39 Democrats, according to the latest report, want this.

Everyone can see that Gorsuch is not the problem, the GOP is not the problem, the nuclear option - that is apparently necessary TO UPHOLD THE DEMOCRATS' OWN REID RULE - is not the problem. The problem is 39 Democrats (out of HOW MANY?) that want to deny the majority of Americans, the GOP, AND most of the Democrats the Judge they like and want based on purely political partisan hatred / theatrics.

 

[Avatar4321]

A mass amnesia has fallen upon Republican senators.

They seem to have forgotten about that time they refused to give President Obama’s nominee for the Supreme Court an up-or-down vote – or even a hearing – last year. Now they are claiming that Democrats are the norm-breakers for threatening to filibuster President Trump’s own Supreme Court nominee, Neil Gorsuch.

Republicans are in a full-scale pressure campaign to convince 41 Democrats not to vote against invoking “cloture” on the debate over Gorsuch, which would prevent him from moving to a floor vote, where he would need only a simple majority to be confirmed.

GOP quotes Reid to justify Supreme Court fight

In an op-ed to appear in Friday's Washington Post, the two Republicans noted that Reid himself pointed out in a floor speech that the Senate didn't have to consider any of Bush's nominees.

"The duties of the United States Senate are set forth in the Constitution of the United States," Reid said at the time. "Nowhere in that document does it say the Senate has a duty to give presidential nominees a vote. It says appointments shall be made with the advice and consent of the Senate. That's very different than saying every nominee receives a vote."

Liberals do it, then when the Republicans do it back at the liberals, the libs go bat shit crazy.. Harry Reid did the nuclear option, now the Republicans will use it also, and again watch how bat shit crazy the liberals act again. Just cant get more stupid than a liberal.

It has never been used on a SC justice in our history. Now if Congress would have confirmed Obama's choices for judgeships along with a bunch of other legislation then Harry would not have need to do anything. Just remember where this began- 2009

Then by definition the move is unprecedented.

You're upset that Republicans are being honest?

 

[Hutch Starskey]

A mass amnesia has fallen upon Republican senators.

Welcome to politics newbie!

Yep. Both parties will do whatever it takes, and then scream when the other party does the same thing.
.

C'Mon Mac, surely you can agree that the Repubs are constantly the driver in these one upmanship games. Do you propose that the Dems should have just sat there and allowed them to block every single one of Obama's judicial nominees? Reid kept it to the federal bench. If the Repubs take it to SCOTUS then they will be escalating yet again.