No better way to energize the DEM voters than to block Obama's nominations...

[Correll]

This isn't Sotomayer replacing Souter, or Kagan replacing Stevens, this is Scalia we are talking about. This would be a makeover of the court, a sea change, and we Conservatives cannot afford to sit back and allow a fucking lib to replace him without the fight of our lives.
This is Obama's huge opportunity to go out with a poke in the eye like we've never been poked before.
If we (Conservatives) lose this one, we could be rendered powerless for years to come as far as the SCOTUS is concerned.

That is the intention of our Constitution. To allow the court to swing back and forth

Conservatives have no lock on control of the Supreme Court
When was the last time liberals controlled the court?

Let see, Obama(scotus) care, Gay marriage....... two rulings which rewrote law and neither sounds very conservative to me.

You guys appointed them

Guess your base is even too extreme for the Justices you appoint

HIs examples undermine your claim that conservatives control the Court OR that this is about conservatives thinking they have a right to have a "lock" on it.

If someone votes conservative 75% of the time, is he still conservative?

Huge liberal polices got the OK.

That is not a "lock".

Conservative judges are not partisan hacks like the ones you libs appoint.

THat's the point.

Dems don't have to go to the wall to stop a conservative judge.

Because conservative judges are not hive minds hell bent on serving the agenda.

 

[Freewill]

No better way to point out Liberal Hypocrisy than educate Liberals by reminding them Hillary and Obama tried to filibuster / defeat Alito's nomination in 2006...

Liberals don't like it when they get served a big spoon-full of their own 'medicine'. It's 'unfair' and 'not right' when a Republican does it but is perfectly fine when they do it. Yeah, whatever. My advice to Liberals, Hillary, and Obama would be to 'embrace the suck'. Fortunately for them, the GOP is full of spineless, weak-minded, self-serving me/party-1st @-holes who will 'cave' and give Obama whatever he wants before he steps down.

Alito was approved 75-25 with 25 Democrats approving his appointment. Will Republicans do the same?

What would have happened if instead of approving Alito, Democrats waited until Obama became President in 2009?

It could go the same way if Obama doesn't nominate some flaming left wing liberal.

Is anyone to the left of Ted Cruz a flaming liberal?

Left of McCain and Romney.

 

[Correll]

They were definitely not obstructionist enough, but the left wing sold the lie and a whole lot of folks repeat it.

Look at the behavior of the GOP over the last eight years:

• Activists shoving absolutist "pledges" in the face of their candidates, threatening to "primary" anyone who didn't sign them
• Attacking any Republican who showed any moderation as a RINO
• Loudly declaring any hint of cooperation with Democrats as unacceptable
• Screaming "socialism" and/or "communism" at any number of existing government programs, wanting to shut down any number of departments
  
• Voting as a bloc against virtually any Democrat initiative

The public sees this. They don't see the Democrats doing this. It's not difficult to characterize that behavior as obstructionist.
.

There has never been activist before, in either party,? really? I never realize that. Seems to me I remember a very successful contract with America not so many years ago. You and me bitch about what they are doing in WH, we do it everyday. Yet when people want to hold their officials accountable you seem to have a problem with them doing so? If an elected official is NOT representing what the people want, what do you suppose they should be threatened with?

The whole political spectrum has swung left. What is considered a moderate today was a flaming liberal not too long ago. What you are proposing is that the right swing even more left then they already have. The country is going into the dumpster and it isn't because the right has won any recent victories. The left wing has won almost everything but the right still gets the blame. BS.

We want them to vote against bad democrat initiatives. We wanted them to vote no for Obamacare. It is not like Congress has not passed laws. They are passing them at about the same rate as any other congress. It is just that some of the things that the democrats want to do is so radical we want them to vote against them in a block. That said, I can't think of any initiative that the democrats wanted they didn't get. Maybe not lock stock and barrel but they got almost everything they wanted.

I described the "what", you're explaining the "why".

If you're right that the whole political spectrum has swung left, and I agree, some self-inspection might be helpful. The usual memes - the press, lying Democrats - notwithstanding, conservatives might want to consider what failures in messaging they can address on their own.
.

We are importing a million Third World voters a year.

This is not about messaging.

Only citizens can vote

I'm sure that is mostly the case.

My point stands. We are importing a million Third World Voters a year.

They mostly vote for the party that shares their Third World politics.

 

[FJO]

No better way to point out Liberal Hypocrisy than educate Liberals by reminding them Hillary and Obama tried to filibuster / defeat Alito's nomination in 2006...

Liberals don't like it when they get served a big spoon-full of their own 'medicine'. It's 'unfair' and 'not right' when a Republican does it but is perfectly fine when they do it. Yeah, whatever. My advice to Liberals, Hillary, and Obama would be to 'embrace the suck'. Fortunately for them, the GOP is full of spineless, weak-minded, self-serving me/party-1st @-holes who will 'cave' and give Obama whatever he wants before he steps down.

Alito was approved 75-25 with 25 Democrats approving his appointment. Will Republicans do the same?

What would have happened if instead of approving Alito, Democrats waited until Obama became President in 2009?

It could go the same way if Obama doesn't nominate some flaming left wing liberal.

But Obama WILL nominate a flaming left wing liberal. Just watch!

 

[Freewill]

This is definitely a win-win for the left wing.

they will cry and stomp their feet about obstructionism unless the Republicans rubber stamp whomever Obama throws at them. Whomever Obama nominates will be a left leaner so if confirmed they win again.

Republicans can only do one thing, stick to their guns and forget that the MSM will paint this as partisan. The process has always been partisan it is nothing new. As has been pointed out in many posts.

 

[Correll]

They were definitely not obstructionist enough, but the left wing sold the lie and a whole lot of folks repeat it.

Look at the behavior of the GOP over the last eight years:

• Activists shoving absolutist "pledges" in the face of their candidates, threatening to "primary" anyone who didn't sign them
• Attacking any Republican who showed any moderation as a RINO
• Loudly declaring any hint of cooperation with Democrats as unacceptable
• Screaming "socialism" and/or "communism" at any number of existing government programs, wanting to shut down any number of departments
  
• Voting as a bloc against virtually any Democrat initiative

The public sees this. They don't see the Democrats doing this. It's not difficult to characterize that behavior as obstructionist.
.

There has never been activist before, in either party,? really? I never realize that. Seems to me I remember a very successful contract with America not so many years ago. You and me bitch about what they are doing in WH, we do it everyday. Yet when people want to hold their officials accountable you seem to have a problem with them doing so? If an elected official is NOT representing what the people want, what do you suppose they should be threatened with?

The whole political spectrum has swung left. What is considered a moderate today was a flaming liberal not too long ago. What you are proposing is that the right swing even more left then they already have. The country is going into the dumpster and it isn't because the right has won any recent victories. The left wing has won almost everything but the right still gets the blame. BS.

We want them to vote against bad democrat initiatives. We wanted them to vote no for Obamacare. It is not like Congress has not passed laws. They are passing them at about the same rate as any other congress. It is just that some of the things that the democrats want to do is so radical we want them to vote against them in a block. That said, I can't think of any initiative that the democrats wanted they didn't get. Maybe not lock stock and barrel but they got almost everything they wanted.

I described the "what", you're explaining the "why".

If you're right that the whole political spectrum has swung left, and I agree, some self-inspection might be helpful. The usual memes - the press, lying Democrats - notwithstanding, conservatives might want to consider what failures in messaging they can address on their own.
.

We are importing a million Third World voters a year.

This is not about messaging.

If that's true, why not?

Can't you communicate with them too?
.

Communication doesn't change a person's basic character or beliefs.

THey come here and vote for the party that has familiar Third World Politics.

 

[Wildman]

Obama's team look like fools.

"look like".....??? they are..!! but not just fools, they are damnable fools

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Rock and a hard place for Republicans. They have to deal with a reputation of being obstructionists, which they brought on themselves.

To the electorate, this just looks like more of the same.
.

Also the same reason for the rise of Trump. Voters say they want things to get done.

 

[Freewill]

No better way to point out Liberal Hypocrisy than educate Liberals by reminding them Hillary and Obama tried to filibuster / defeat Alito's nomination in 2006...

Liberals don't like it when they get served a big spoon-full of their own 'medicine'. It's 'unfair' and 'not right' when a Republican does it but is perfectly fine when they do it. Yeah, whatever. My advice to Liberals, Hillary, and Obama would be to 'embrace the suck'. Fortunately for them, the GOP is full of spineless, weak-minded, self-serving me/party-1st @-holes who will 'cave' and give Obama whatever he wants before he steps down.

Alito was approved 75-25 with 25 Democrats approving his appointment. Will Republicans do the same?

What would have happened if instead of approving Alito, Democrats waited until Obama became President in 2009?

It could go the same way if Obama doesn't nominate some flaming left wing liberal.

But Obama WILL nominate a flaming left wing liberal. Just watch!

Of course he will, that is the best campaign news he could generate for free. Mrs.Bosnia Clinton will be the benefactor.

Now, if he doesn't and it breezes through, doubtful, that means to me he is screwing with Mrs. Bosnia Clinton. Which I don't think he really is all that fond of.

 

[Freewill]

Rock and a hard place for Republicans. They have to deal with a reputation of being obstructionists, which they brought on themselves.

To the electorate, this just looks like more of the same.
.

Also the same reason for the rise of Trump. Voters say they want things to get done.

I keep hearing "get things done." WHAT do the voters want DONE? I am thinking most voters don't get passed Mrs. Bosnia Clinton being a woman. For crying out loud she is now barking like a dog and they still support her.

 

[rightwinger]

No better way to point out Liberal Hypocrisy than educate Liberals by reminding them Hillary and Obama tried to filibuster / defeat Alito's nomination in 2006...

Liberals don't like it when they get served a big spoon-full of their own 'medicine'. It's 'unfair' and 'not right' when a Republican does it but is perfectly fine when they do it. Yeah, whatever. My advice to Liberals, Hillary, and Obama would be to 'embrace the suck'. Fortunately for them, the GOP is full of spineless, weak-minded, self-serving me/party-1st @-holes who will 'cave' and give Obama whatever he wants before he steps down.

Alito was approved 75-25 with 25 Democrats approving his appointment. Will Republicans do the same?

What would have happened if instead of approving Alito, Democrats waited until Obama became President in 2009?

It could go the same way if Obama doesn't nominate some flaming left wing liberal.

But Obama WILL nominate a flaming left wing liberal. Just watch!

He might send up a sacrificial lamb to allow Republicans to get a rejection to satisfy their base. Once Republicans reject his first pick...they will have a tough time rejecting a moderate

 

[FJO]

No better way to point out Liberal Hypocrisy than educate Liberals by reminding them Hillary and Obama tried to filibuster / defeat Alito's nomination in 2006...

Liberals don't like it when they get served a big spoon-full of their own 'medicine'. It's 'unfair' and 'not right' when a Republican does it but is perfectly fine when they do it. Yeah, whatever. My advice to Liberals, Hillary, and Obama would be to 'embrace the suck'. Fortunately for them, the GOP is full of spineless, weak-minded, self-serving me/party-1st @-holes who will 'cave' and give Obama whatever he wants before he steps down.

Alito was approved 75-25 with 25 Democrats approving his appointment. Will Republicans do the same?

What would have happened if instead of approving Alito, Democrats waited until Obama became President in 2009?

It could go the same way if Obama doesn't nominate some flaming left wing liberal.

But Obama WILL nominate a flaming left wing liberal. Just watch!

He might send up a sacrificial lamb to allow Republicans to get a rejection to satisfy their base. Once Republicans reject his first pick...they will have a tough time rejecting a moderate

When - not if - the first flaming liberal is - rightfully and righteously - rejected, count on Obama to send up another one just like the first one, but probably worse.

That who Obama is. The scorpion riding on the back of the frog across the river.

 

[Freewill]

Here is what I don't understand.

What in the country is going so well that the left wing thinks Obama has done a good job and we need to continue that success?

Tractor companies moving to Cuba?

A flood of immigrants?

More people out of work on welfare then ever?

What exactly? Gays, getting married? really?

What, what exactly do you think are the accomplishments of this democrat president that should make people vote for Mrs. Bosnia Clinton who says she wants to continue the progress that Obama has made?

 

[candycorn]

Rock and a hard place for Republicans. They have to deal with a reputation of being obstructionists, which they brought on themselves. To the electorate, this just looks like more of the same..

They were definitely not obstructionist enough, but the left wing sold the lie and a whole lot of folks repeat it.

Look at the behavior of the GOP over the last eight years:

• Activists shoving absolutist "pledges" in the face of their candidates, threatening to "primary" anyone who didn't sign them
• Attacking any Republican who showed any moderation as a RINO
• Loudly declaring any hint of cooperation with Democrats as unacceptable
• Screaming "socialism" and/or "communism" at any number of existing government programs, wanting to shut down any number of departments
  
• Voting as a bloc against virtually any Democrat initiative

The public sees this. They don't see the Democrats doing this. It's not difficult to characterize that behavior as obstructionist.
.

There has never been activist before, in either party,? really? I never realize that. Seems to me I remember a very successful contract with America not so many years ago. You and me bitch about what they are doing in WH, we do it everyday. Yet when people want to hold their officials accountable you seem to have a problem with them doing so? If an elected official is NOT representing what the people want, what do you suppose they should be threatened with?

The whole political spectrum has swung left. What is considered a moderate today was a flaming liberal not too long ago. What you are proposing is that the right swing even more left then they already have. The country is going into the dumpster and it isn't because the right has won any recent victories. The left wing has won almost everything but the right still gets the blame. BS.

We want them to vote against bad democrat initiatives. We wanted them to vote no for Obamacare. It is not like Congress has not passed laws. They are passing them at about the same rate as any other congress. It is just that some of the things that the democrats want to do is so radical we want them to vote against them in a block. That said, I can't think of any initiative that the democrats wanted they didn't get. Maybe not lock stock and barrel but they got almost everything they wanted.

I described the "what", you're explaining the "why".

If you're right that the whole political spectrum has swung left, and I agree, some self-inspection might be helpful. The usual memes - the press, lying Democrats - notwithstanding, conservatives might want to consider what failures in messaging they can address on their own.
.

We are importing a million Third World voters a year.

This is not about messaging.

You're right. It's about the bedrock conservative principles being outdated due to their shortsightedness, their dyed-in-the-wool hate aspect, and frankly their "our way is better because we say so" nonsense. The messengers such as yourself and the other morons on this and other message boards do not help the matter. Case in point, the post I'm responding to; pulled right out of thin air, zero citations, and totally hateful.

 

[candycorn]

Here is what I don't understand.

What in the country is going so well that the left wing thinks Obama has done a good job and we need to continue that success?

Tractor companies moving to Cuba?

A flood of immigrants?

More people out of work on welfare then ever?

What exactly? Gays, getting married? really?

What, what exactly do you think are the accomplishments of this democrat president that should make people vote for Mrs. Bosnia Clinton who says she wants to continue the progress that Obama has made?

That it will keep you guys referring to people as "Bosnia Clinton" is reason enough for me.

 

[Freewill]

They were definitely not obstructionist enough, but the left wing sold the lie and a whole lot of folks repeat it.

Look at the behavior of the GOP over the last eight years:

• Activists shoving absolutist "pledges" in the face of their candidates, threatening to "primary" anyone who didn't sign them
• Attacking any Republican who showed any moderation as a RINO
• Loudly declaring any hint of cooperation with Democrats as unacceptable
• Screaming "socialism" and/or "communism" at any number of existing government programs, wanting to shut down any number of departments
  
• Voting as a bloc against virtually any Democrat initiative

The public sees this. They don't see the Democrats doing this. It's not difficult to characterize that behavior as obstructionist.
.

There has never been activist before, in either party,? really? I never realize that. Seems to me I remember a very successful contract with America not so many years ago. You and me bitch about what they are doing in WH, we do it everyday. Yet when people want to hold their officials accountable you seem to have a problem with them doing so? If an elected official is NOT representing what the people want, what do you suppose they should be threatened with?

The whole political spectrum has swung left. What is considered a moderate today was a flaming liberal not too long ago. What you are proposing is that the right swing even more left then they already have. The country is going into the dumpster and it isn't because the right has won any recent victories. The left wing has won almost everything but the right still gets the blame. BS.

We want them to vote against bad democrat initiatives. We wanted them to vote no for Obamacare. It is not like Congress has not passed laws. They are passing them at about the same rate as any other congress. It is just that some of the things that the democrats want to do is so radical we want them to vote against them in a block. That said, I can't think of any initiative that the democrats wanted they didn't get. Maybe not lock stock and barrel but they got almost everything they wanted.

I described the "what", you're explaining the "why".

If you're right that the whole political spectrum has swung left, and I agree, some self-inspection might be helpful. The usual memes - the press, lying Democrats - notwithstanding, conservatives might want to consider what failures in messaging they can address on their own.
.

We are importing a million Third World voters a year.

This is not about messaging.

You're right. It's about the bedrock conservative principles being outdated due to their shortsightedness, their dyed-in-the-wool hate aspect, and frankly their "our way is better because we say so" nonsense. The messengers such as yourself and the other morons on this and other message boards do not help the matter. Case in point, the post I'm responding to; pulled right out of thin air, zero citations, and totally hateful.

What is with the left that they have to invoke hate into every one of their responses? Do you understand how HATEFUL you sound?

 

[Freewill]

Here is what I don't understand.

What in the country is going so well that the left wing thinks Obama has done a good job and we need to continue that success?

Tractor companies moving to Cuba?

A flood of immigrants?

More people out of work on welfare then ever?

What exactly? Gays, getting married? really?

What, what exactly do you think are the accomplishments of this democrat president that should make people vote for Mrs. Bosnia Clinton who says she wants to continue the progress that Obama has made?

That it will keep you guys referring to people as "Bosnia Clinton" is reason enough for me.

OH, because I point out her very self serving obvious lying is the reason you will vote for a lying self serving politician. Wow, just wow. I doubt a person could be more shallow.

What it comes down to is that the left will nominate Mrs. Bosnia Clinton because they know how much, deservedly, she is despised. The left loves shoving down their agenda, more so then doing what is right for the country. Mrs. Bosnia Clinton is a confirmed liar beyond anyone else, she is now a barking dog sounding woman who is not worthy or right for the country. And I will keep reminding you of her lying ways, whether you like it or not.

 

[Correll]

They were definitely not obstructionist enough, but the left wing sold the lie and a whole lot of folks repeat it.

Look at the behavior of the GOP over the last eight years:

• Activists shoving absolutist "pledges" in the face of their candidates, threatening to "primary" anyone who didn't sign them
• Attacking any Republican who showed any moderation as a RINO
• Loudly declaring any hint of cooperation with Democrats as unacceptable
• Screaming "socialism" and/or "communism" at any number of existing government programs, wanting to shut down any number of departments
  
• Voting as a bloc against virtually any Democrat initiative

The public sees this. They don't see the Democrats doing this. It's not difficult to characterize that behavior as obstructionist.
.

There has never been activist before, in either party,? really? I never realize that. Seems to me I remember a very successful contract with America not so many years ago. You and me bitch about what they are doing in WH, we do it everyday. Yet when people want to hold their officials accountable you seem to have a problem with them doing so? If an elected official is NOT representing what the people want, what do you suppose they should be threatened with?

The whole political spectrum has swung left. What is considered a moderate today was a flaming liberal not too long ago. What you are proposing is that the right swing even more left then they already have. The country is going into the dumpster and it isn't because the right has won any recent victories. The left wing has won almost everything but the right still gets the blame. BS.

We want them to vote against bad democrat initiatives. We wanted them to vote no for Obamacare. It is not like Congress has not passed laws. They are passing them at about the same rate as any other congress. It is just that some of the things that the democrats want to do is so radical we want them to vote against them in a block. That said, I can't think of any initiative that the democrats wanted they didn't get. Maybe not lock stock and barrel but they got almost everything they wanted.

I described the "what", you're explaining the "why".

If you're right that the whole political spectrum has swung left, and I agree, some self-inspection might be helpful. The usual memes - the press, lying Democrats - notwithstanding, conservatives might want to consider what failures in messaging they can address on their own.
.

We are importing a million Third World voters a year.

This is not about messaging.

You're right. It's about the bedrock conservative principles being outdated due to their shortsightedness, their dyed-in-the-wool hate aspect, and frankly their "our way is better because we say so" nonsense. The messengers such as yourself and the other morons on this and other message boards do not help the matter. Case in point, the post I'm responding to; pulled right out of thin air, zero citations, and totally hateful.

There is nothing "hateful" about pointing out that Third World Immigrants find the Democratic policies more to their liking.

Dems point that out all the time.

Is it ok for them to crow about their coming demographic majority but wrong for me to bitch about it?

Rhetorical Question: I know that answer is "YES" though you are probably too dishonest to admit it.


What is "hateful" and poisonous is slamming anyone who points out the negative effects from such a change as "hateful".

YOu want to talk "divisive"?

Slamming down every attempt at a serious discussion by calling people vile names, that "divides" people.

And to dumb it down to make sure you don't play dumb,

I'm talking about you and yours.

 

[rightwinger]

No better way to point out Liberal Hypocrisy than educate Liberals by reminding them Hillary and Obama tried to filibuster / defeat Alito's nomination in 2006...

Liberals don't like it when they get served a big spoon-full of their own 'medicine'. It's 'unfair' and 'not right' when a Republican does it but is perfectly fine when they do it. Yeah, whatever. My advice to Liberals, Hillary, and Obama would be to 'embrace the suck'. Fortunately for them, the GOP is full of spineless, weak-minded, self-serving me/party-1st @-holes who will 'cave' and give Obama whatever he wants before he steps down.

Alito was approved 75-25 with 25 Democrats approving his appointment. Will Republicans do the same?

What would have happened if instead of approving Alito, Democrats waited until Obama became President in 2009?

It could go the same way if Obama doesn't nominate some flaming left wing liberal.

But Obama WILL nominate a flaming left wing liberal. Just watch!

He might send up a sacrificial lamb to allow Republicans to get a rejection to satisfy their base. Once Republicans reject his first pick...they will have a tough time rejecting a moderate

When - not if - the first flaming liberal is - rightfully and righteously - rejected, count on Obama to send up another one just like the first one, but probably worse.

That who Obama is. The scorpion riding on the back of the frog across the river.

Republicans will do better with an Obama nominee than one from Hillary of Sanders
Do they want to take the chance?

If Republicans were smart (and we know they aren't) they would send Obama a short list of candidates they would be willing to support. It is their best shot

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Rock and a hard place for Republicans. They have to deal with a reputation of being obstructionists, which they brought on themselves.

To the electorate, this just looks like more of the same.
.

Also the same reason for the rise of Trump. Voters say they want things to get done.

I keep hearing "get things done." WHAT do the voters want DONE? I am thinking most voters don't get passed Mrs. Bosnia Clinton being a woman. For crying out loud she is now barking like a dog and they still support her.

Everything I've read points to that. Don't think you read anything.
They are going for the outsider Trump specifically because the congress does nothing. They're looking for a shake up to get things moving. McConnell's plan to blow off a nominee would almost certainly backfire in that regard.