Obama Now Has the Power to Appoint 93 Federal Judges

[Quantum Windbag]

They did.

But with Obama, they laid it on thicker than anything that had ever happened before in our entire history.

Posting lies really doesn't make your case.

you 're not get anywhere.......the filibustering of judicial nominees took off in 2002, I have posted a link detailing that, so that make it lets see, 11 years and 3 presidents but that graphic includes all other Presidents to blow it up as making it appear more egregious than it is.......

It doesn't include all the presidents, it only goes back to 1975 when the rules on ending a filibuster were changed. It then pretends that, since there were no cloture votes before that point in time, that no previous president ever had a nominee filibustered.

 

[mamooth]

The whole point of the Senate is to give a bit of power to the party that lost so that the majority cannot run rough shod over the rights of the minority.

In that case, why not set the cloture level at 95 votes? You must really hate minority rights if you disagree with that.

Point is, the Senate already protects minority rights by giving excessive voting weight to rocks and trees. Without the filibuster at all, the senate already overrepresents minorities. As the 95 vote example shows, it can be taken to ridiculous levels, and it's a good argument that even 60 votes is a ridiculous level.

 

[paperview]

They did.

But with Obama, they laid it on thicker than anything that had ever happened before in our entire history.

Posting lies really doesn't make your case.

you 're not get anywhere.......the filibustering of judicial nominees took off in 2002, I have posted a link detailing that, so that make it lets see, 11 years and 3 presidents but that graphic includes all other Presidents to blow it up as making it appear more egregious than it is.......

Here...better?

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...reid-says-82-presidential-nominees-have-been/

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Then that's not repealing, is it?

You said "Remember that argument when the Republicans repeal Obamacare with 51 votes."

So, you're obviously changing tack now, and to defunding....have at it. Let the House bog up the bills, the senate refuse to pass -- and see how the chips fall with the reelection campaigns.

Do it.

It is repealing it, you just think the veto means the vote was invalid. That isn't my fault, you should take it up with your teacher.

Besides, by that time the Democrats who are planning on running in 2016 will see the writing on the wall, and it will only take a few of them to jump ship to override the veto. Throw in a return of the filibuster rules, a few bribes here and there, and it really shouldn't be a problem.

Unless, that is, you are still operating under the delusion that Obamacare is only glint to get more popular as time goes by. You have been saying that for over 3 years, and been consistently wrong, but I see no reason for you to start admitting it at this point in time.

This post is just head-shake worthy.

Filled with gibberish, things I never said, and just a ground up mush of cow cud.

Carry on in whatever world you're living in.


Cya.

You never said what?

I said that it is possible for the Republicans to repeal Obamacare as early as 2015. You then claimed that a presidential veto would, somehow, magically make that vote not a repeal. It wouldn't, it would just prevent that vote from becoming law. That is assuming two things, 1) that it is actually vetoed, and 2) that the veto is not overridden.

 

[paperview]

Harry Reid says 82 presidential nominees have been blocked under President Barack Obama, 86 blocked under all other presidents

Our ruling
Reid’s graphic said that "in the history of the United States, 168 presidential nominees have been filibustered, 82 blocked under President Obama, 86 blocked under all the other presidents."


The figures are solidly sourced to the Congressional Research Service, but the graphic’s wording was wrong -- an error that Reid’s office acknowledged after we contacted them, and for which they released a corrected version of the graphic. Meanwhile, the question of how many pre-Obama presidents should be included is a bit murkier. The CRS report doesn’t incorporate data prior to 1949, but there’s evidence that blocked nominations were rare to nonexistent before that.


Since the revised numbers actually increase the accuracy of Reid's underlying point -- that blockages under Obama have accounted for a disproportionate share of those undertaken in United States history -- we rate the claim Mostly True."


PolitiFact | Harry Reid says 82 presidential nominees have been blocked under President Barack Obama, 86 blocked under all other presidents

 

[Trajan]

Posting lies really doesn't make your case.

you 're not get anywhere.......the filibustering of judicial nominees took off in 2002, I have posted a link detailing that, so that make it lets see, 11 years and 3 presidents but that graphic includes all other Presidents to blow it up as making it appear more egregious than it is.......

Here...better?

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...reid-says-82-presidential-nominees-have-been/

"Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt."

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The whole point of the Senate is to give a bit of power to the party that lost so that the majority cannot run rough shod over the rights of the minority.

In that case, why not set the cloture level at 95 votes? You must really hate minority rights if you disagree with that.

Point is, the Senate already protects minority rights by giving excessive voting weight to rocks and trees. Without the filibuster at all, the senate already overrepresents minorities. As the 95 vote example shows, it can be taken to ridiculous levels, and it's a good argument that even 60 votes is a ridiculous level.

Why not pretend you can actually think?

Mostly because you rarely exhibit any abilities to do so, which leads me to believe that, occasionally, someone comes along and points out to you how stupid your post is before you can post it.

 

[paperview]

Now the Windbag thinks Congress is going to go supermajority in 2014.

 

[paperview]

you 're not get anywhere.......the filibustering of judicial nominees took off in 2002, I have posted a link detailing that, so that make it lets see, 11 years and 3 presidents but that graphic includes all other Presidents to blow it up as making it appear more egregious than it is.......

Here...better?

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...reid-says-82-presidential-nominees-have-been/

"Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt."

Good advice. You should heed it.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Now the Windbag thinks Congress is going to go supermajority in 2014.

Did I say that? I must be getting senile. I could have sworn I said it would only take a few Democrats worried about getting reelected to override a veto.

Wait, I did say that, does that mean that the hack is simply being a hack?

 

[paperview]

Now the Windbag thinks Congress is going to go supermajority in 2014.

Did I say that? I must be getting senile. I could have sworn I said it would only take a few Democrats worried about getting reelected to override a veto.

Wait, I did say that, does that mean that the hack is simply being a hack?

Guess so.

Own it, baby.

 

[paperview]

Obamacare Has a Friend in the Health Care Industry

In the LA Times today, Noam Levey writes that Obamacare has an ace in the hole: the insurance industry. Sure, they have their gripes:

But since 2010, they have invested billions of dollars to overhaul their businesses, design new insurance plans and physician practices and develop better ways to monitor quality and control costs.

Few industry leaders want to go back to a system that most had concluded was failing, as costs skyrocketed and the ranks of the uninsured swelled. Nor do they see much that is promising from the law's Republican critics. The GOP has focused on repealing Obamacare, but has devoted less energy to developing a replacement.

.... For many of these organizations, the prospect of new customers and a more rational system outweighs their sometimes intense irritation with the Obama administration. Insurance executives, in particular, have gnashed their teeth at the president's attacks on their industry....Despite the frustrations, most insurers remain committed to moving to a new market that would achieve the central promise of the Affordable Care Act: that all consumers can buy health plans even if they have preexisting medical conditions.
​

This is really a crucial point. Like it or not, the entire health care industry has spent the past three years gearing up for the rollout of Obamacare. At this point, they're committed—and doubly so since the Republican Party very clearly has no real alternative for them.

 

[mamooth]

Why not pretend you can actually think?

Why not develop a spine and respond honestly? Oh, that's right, honest discussion has always been beyond you.

You always run when challenged your on your bizarre unsupported revisionist claims. It's quite funny. You make those grand pronouncements about being independent, about using logic and not resorting to insults. And yet when the rubber hits the road, you evade all questions that embarrass you, covering your panicked retreat with insults.

At least the Tea Party cranks are honest about being mindless partisans. You're every bit the extreme partisan they are, but you add dishonesty to your list of sins.

Now, just in case your spine has solidified, try responding. Why is 60 the right number, but not 95? Isn't it important to protect minority rights?

 

[Dot Com]

ninety- three. That has a nice ring to it. Thanks Repubs for hastening the rules change through your over-the-top obstruction.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Why not pretend you can actually think?

Why not develop a spine and respond honestly? Oh, that's right, honest discussion has always been beyond you.

You always run when challenged your on your bizarre unsupported revisionist claims. It's quite funny. You make those grand pronouncements about being independent, about using logic and not resorting to insults. And yet when the rubber hits the road, you evade all questions that embarrass you, covering your panicked retreat with insults.

At least the Tea Party cranks are honest about being mindless partisans. You're every bit the extreme partisan they are, but you add dishonesty to your list of sins.

Now, just in case your spine has solidified, try responding. Why is 60 the right number, but not 95? Isn't it important to protect minority rights?

If you think I didn't respond honestly you should have read the part of the quote you edited out.

Is the real problem that you don't want an honest assessment of your abilities?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

ninety- three. That has a nice ring to it. Thanks Repubs for hastening the rules change through your over-the-top obstruction.

If Republicans are at fault for all those vacancies, why hasn't Obama nominated anyone for 90 of those vacancies? Why is it that he is only worried about 3 of them on one court?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Here's an 'oh yeah I remember that now' moment for some of you:

Remember back when the GOP had the majority in the Senate, and talk of the 'nuclear option' came up?

Remember what the conservatives - fancying themselves quite clever - came up with as the alternative name for the 'nuclear option'?

The 'constitutional option'.

...lol, oh yeah, now you remember...

What I remember is the Gang of 14 getting together and ending the debate. Then again, you always did live in an alternate universe.

hey for carb and the rest here I guess being a person who has not shot someone and someone who has, equals exactly the same thing, talk about a corruption of logic....



and for those adding gop snippets of the gop sptting the nuclear option, well, vis a vis the dems who said same when they were under the gun, guess what?

its not the gop who are the hypocrites here, its the folks who pulled the trigger.

lol, that's a new one.

So listen, conservatives...Trajan is saying that all of you who are calling President Obama a hypocrite on this filibuster issue, you people are fucking idiots because the President doesn't have a vote in the Senate.

 

[hazlnut]

ELECTIONS HAVE CONSEQUENCES, BITCHES!!!

Imagine if the GOP had engaged in some honest debate and conducted themselves with integrity. They may have gotten some of their own judges appointed through honest compromise. NOW THEY CAN SUCK IT!!!

 

[paperview]

ninety- three. That has a nice ring to it. Thanks Repubs for hastening the rules change through your over-the-top obstruction.

If Republicans are at fault for all those vacancies, why hasn't Obama nominated anyone for 90 of those vacancies? Why is it that he is only worried about 3 of them on one court?

He has. 51 of them:

Judicial Vacancies

The DC Circuit is a little more important than District Courts.

And the bulk of the remaining ones on the District Courts are from states that have "blue slip" pogo written on them.

 

[P@triot]

ELECTIONS HAVE CONSEQUENCES, BITCHES!!!

Imagine if the GOP had engaged in some honest debate and conducted themselves with integrity. They may have gotten some of their own judges appointed through honest compromise. NOW THEY CAN SUCK IT!!!

The party of lies ("I did not have sexual relations with that woman") and complete absence of integrity ("the ends justify the means") wants to talk about "honesty" and "integrity"???

Holy shit, that is the best laugh I've had in a while. The left is so dishonest, they actually lie about the most trivial, irrelevant of subjects. Like when Hillary Clinton claimed she landed - as First Lady - under "sniper fire". There was simply no reason to lie about something like that. Yet she did. They lie so much, they can't even keep their lies straight ("If you like your plan, you can keep your plan"). Oh, and lets not forget that during the debate for Obamacare, he swore it would "only" cost $800+ billion. Turns out he knew it would cost over $2 trillion but instructed his minions to keep the narrative under the trillion dollar price tag so the American people would buy what he was selling. I would go on, but the lies by the Dumbocrats in ONE day are so many, it would literally crash the USMB servers.

Hazl, you are one of the more comical lapdogs on USMB...