Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Again Mr. Know-It-All, a second read for you. You really shouldn't let your big mouth overload your fat ass, sport!!Apparently you are refusing to read what the Constitution says.There is no favor required to be earned. The Senate has a Constitutional requirement to fulfill. If Grassley and McConnell don't do their required duties under the Constitution and defiantly refuse to carryout their sworn responsibilities, then they should be impeached, tried and thrown out of the office of trust they hold.Obama will be denied a hearing on his SCOTUS nomination, period. The lawless punk hasn't earned any favors from the GOP senate.
If Obama is lawless as you and others so vehemently affirm, then why the Hell haven't the House and Senate done the same to him? Again, they're not carrying out their Constitutional responsibilities.
Your bitching about one and not about the other smacks of bloody partisan hypocrisy!
Biden read it.
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
Remarks by Joe Biden in 1992 have somehow mystically and magically become law, USSC precedent and/or a Senate Rule? Can you cite the Title, Chapter and Section in the US Code where that is codified or became law and legal precedent by citing the SCOTUS case in which that was established OR the Senate Rule? No, you can't because you are in gross error and being a GOP lemming parroting the party line from The Minders!
You also assert that the, "The Constitution clearly states the Senate the has the last word on any SCJ nomination...." It is the President who actually has the last word regarding SCOTUS by actually making the appointment with the Senate in an intermediate role with only the power to give advice and to consent or withhold their consent through the Constitutional process in Article II, § 2, Clause 2, your errors notwithstanding!
The "advice and consent" clause is a de facto check and balance on the process as conceived by the Framers of the Constitution, and was not envisioned to be used as political tool so one corrupt faction can dominate and run the clock until a more favorable time, betting on the come!
Obama will be denied and there's not a damn thing Democrats can do about it, especially since they themselves have advocated for the exact same thing when a Republican was president.
How inventive and cleaver of you to find a dodge such as that, you partisan hackneyed hypocrite!There is no favor required to be earned. The Senate has a Constitutional requirement to fulfill. If Grassley and McConnell don't do their required duties under the Constitution and defiantly refuse to carryout their sworn responsibilities, then they should be impeached, tried and thrown out of the office of trust they hold.Obama will be denied a hearing on his SCOTUS nomination, period. The lawless punk hasn't earned any favors from the GOP senate.
If Obama is lawless as you and others so vehemently affirm, then why the Hell haven't the House and Senate done the same to him? Again, they're not carrying out their Constitutional responsibilities.
Your bitching about one and not about the other smacks of bloody partisan hypocrisy!
They are pretty busy, they probably won't get to this until Jan 20th of next year.
How inventive and cleaver of you to find a dodge such as that, you partisan hackneyed hypocrite!There is no favor required to be earned. The Senate has a Constitutional requirement to fulfill. If Grassley and McConnell don't do their required duties under the Constitution and defiantly refuse to carryout their sworn responsibilities, then they should be impeached, tried and thrown out of the office of trust they hold.Obama will be denied a hearing on his SCOTUS nomination, period. The lawless punk hasn't earned any favors from the GOP senate.
If Obama is lawless as you and others so vehemently affirm, then why the Hell haven't the House and Senate done the same to him? Again, they're not carrying out their Constitutional responsibilities.
Your bitching about one and not about the other smacks of bloody partisan hypocrisy!
They are pretty busy, they probably won't get to this until Jan 20th of next year.
Strom Thurmond, Republican, fiercely rebutted Biden's argument.Again Mr. Know-It-All, a second read for you. You really shouldn't let your big mouth overload your fat ass, sport!!Apparently you are refusing to read what the Constitution says.There is no favor required to be earned. The Senate has a Constitutional requirement to fulfill. If Grassley and McConnell don't do their required duties under the Constitution and defiantly refuse to carryout their sworn responsibilities, then they should be impeached, tried and thrown out of the office of trust they hold.Obama will be denied a hearing on his SCOTUS nomination, period. The lawless punk hasn't earned any favors from the GOP senate.
If Obama is lawless as you and others so vehemently affirm, then why the Hell haven't the House and Senate done the same to him? Again, they're not carrying out their Constitutional responsibilities.
Your bitching about one and not about the other smacks of bloody partisan hypocrisy!
Biden read it.
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
Remarks by Joe Biden in 1992 have somehow mystically and magically become law, USSC precedent and/or a Senate Rule? Can you cite the Title, Chapter and Section in the US Code where that is codified or became law and legal precedent by citing the SCOTUS case in which that was established OR the Senate Rule? No, you can't because you are in gross error and being a GOP lemming parroting the party line from The Minders!
You also assert that the, "The Constitution clearly states the Senate the has the last word on any SCJ nomination...." It is the President who actually has the last word regarding SCOTUS by actually making the appointment with the Senate in an intermediate role with only the power to give advice and to consent or withhold their consent through the Constitutional process in Article II, § 2, Clause 2, your errors notwithstanding!
The "advice and consent" clause is a de facto check and balance on the process as conceived by the Framers of the Constitution, and was not envisioned to be used as political tool so one corrupt faction can dominate and run the clock until a more favorable time, betting on the come!
Obama will be denied and there's not a damn thing Democrats can do about it, especially since they themselves have advocated for the exact same thing when a Republican was president.
Perhaps that scenario may play out, but the Dems may get a huge lift through the summer and into next November with prolonged inaction by the GOP faction over this issue among others. If the Elephant candidate loses to the Mule candidate, there will be a big change in the House and Senate...read that coattails effect. You and others will disavow that could ever happen, but then you're the same bunch that believe that Biden's comments from 24 years ago have actual force and effect!Again Mr. Know-It-All, a second read for you. You really shouldn't let your big mouth overload your fat ass, sport!!Apparently you are refusing to read what the Constitution says.There is no favor required to be earned. The Senate has a Constitutional requirement to fulfill. If Grassley and McConnell don't do their required duties under the Constitution and defiantly refuse to carryout their sworn responsibilities, then they should be impeached, tried and thrown out of the office of trust they hold.Obama will be denied a hearing on his SCOTUS nomination, period. The lawless punk hasn't earned any favors from the GOP senate.
If Obama is lawless as you and others so vehemently affirm, then why the Hell haven't the House and Senate done the same to him? Again, they're not carrying out their Constitutional responsibilities.
Your bitching about one and not about the other smacks of bloody partisan hypocrisy!
Biden read it.
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
Remarks by Joe Biden in 1992 have somehow mystically and magically become law, USSC precedent and/or a Senate Rule? Can you cite the Title, Chapter and Section in the US Code where that is codified or became law and legal precedent by citing the SCOTUS case in which that was established OR the Senate Rule? No, you can't because you are in gross error and being a GOP lemming parroting the party line from The Minders!
You also assert that the, "The Constitution clearly states the Senate the has the last word on any SCJ nomination...." It is the President who actually has the last word regarding SCOTUS by actually making the appointment with the Senate in an intermediate role with only the power to give advice and to consent or withhold their consent through the Constitutional process in Article II, § 2, Clause 2, your errors notwithstanding!
The "advice and consent" clause is a de facto check and balance on the process as conceived by the Framers of the Constitution, and was not envisioned to be used as political tool so one corrupt faction can dominate and run the clock until a more favorable time, betting on the come!
Obama will be denied and there's not a damn thing Democrats can do about it, especially since they themselves have advocated for the exact same thing when a Republican was president.
Perhaps that scenario may play out, but the Dems may get a huge lift through the summer and into next November with prolonged inaction by the GOP faction over this issue among others. If the Elephant candidate loses to the Mule candidate, there will be a big change in the House and Senate...read that coattails effect. You and others will disavow that could ever happen, but then you're the same bunch that believe that Biden's comments from 24 years ago have actual force and effect!Again Mr. Know-It-All, a second read for you. You really shouldn't let your big mouth overload your fat ass, sport!!Apparently you are refusing to read what the Constitution says.There is no favor required to be earned. The Senate has a Constitutional requirement to fulfill. If Grassley and McConnell don't do their required duties under the Constitution and defiantly refuse to carryout their sworn responsibilities, then they should be impeached, tried and thrown out of the office of trust they hold.Obama will be denied a hearing on his SCOTUS nomination, period. The lawless punk hasn't earned any favors from the GOP senate.
If Obama is lawless as you and others so vehemently affirm, then why the Hell haven't the House and Senate done the same to him? Again, they're not carrying out their Constitutional responsibilities.
Your bitching about one and not about the other smacks of bloody partisan hypocrisy!
Biden read it.
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
Remarks by Joe Biden in 1992 have somehow mystically and magically become law, USSC precedent and/or a Senate Rule? Can you cite the Title, Chapter and Section in the US Code where that is codified or became law and legal precedent by citing the SCOTUS case in which that was established OR the Senate Rule? No, you can't because you are in gross error and being a GOP lemming parroting the party line from The Minders!
You also assert that the, "The Constitution clearly states the Senate the has the last word on any SCJ nomination...." It is the President who actually has the last word regarding SCOTUS by actually making the appointment with the Senate in an intermediate role with only the power to give advice and to consent or withhold their consent through the Constitutional process in Article II, § 2, Clause 2, your errors notwithstanding!
The "advice and consent" clause is a de facto check and balance on the process as conceived by the Framers of the Constitution, and was not envisioned to be used as political tool so one corrupt faction can dominate and run the clock until a more favorable time, betting on the come!
Obama will be denied and there's not a damn thing Democrats can do about it, especially since they themselves have advocated for the exact same thing when a Republican was president.
The Democrats conducted hearings and confirmed conservative judges Scalia, Thomas and Alito while a Republican was presidentAgain Mr. Know-It-All, a second read for you. You really shouldn't let your big mouth overload your fat ass, sport!!Apparently you are refusing to read what the Constitution says.There is no favor required to be earned. The Senate has a Constitutional requirement to fulfill. If Grassley and McConnell don't do their required duties under the Constitution and defiantly refuse to carryout their sworn responsibilities, then they should be impeached, tried and thrown out of the office of trust they hold.Obama will be denied a hearing on his SCOTUS nomination, period. The lawless punk hasn't earned any favors from the GOP senate.
If Obama is lawless as you and others so vehemently affirm, then why the Hell haven't the House and Senate done the same to him? Again, they're not carrying out their Constitutional responsibilities.
Your bitching about one and not about the other smacks of bloody partisan hypocrisy!
Biden read it.
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
Remarks by Joe Biden in 1992 have somehow mystically and magically become law, USSC precedent and/or a Senate Rule? Can you cite the Title, Chapter and Section in the US Code where that is codified or became law and legal precedent by citing the SCOTUS case in which that was established OR the Senate Rule? No, you can't because you are in gross error and being a GOP lemming parroting the party line from The Minders!
You also assert that the, "The Constitution clearly states the Senate the has the last word on any SCJ nomination...." It is the President who actually has the last word regarding SCOTUS by actually making the appointment with the Senate in an intermediate role with only the power to give advice and to consent or withhold their consent through the Constitutional process in Article II, § 2, Clause 2, your errors notwithstanding!
The "advice and consent" clause is a de facto check and balance on the process as conceived by the Framers of the Constitution, and was not envisioned to be used as political tool so one corrupt faction can dominate and run the clock until a more favorable time, betting on the come!
Obama will be denied and there's not a damn thing Democrats can do about it, especially since they themselves have advocated for the exact same thing when a Republican was president.
just that we are exorcising our constitutional right to advise and consentWhat justification do Republicans have ?
that also means we can choose to not consent.
In an effort to be bipartisan, we should support Crazy Uncle Joe's position on this one, let the people decide!
The Democrats conducted hearings and confirmed conservative judges Scalia, Thomas and Alito while a Republican was presidentAgain Mr. Know-It-All, a second read for you. You really shouldn't let your big mouth overload your fat ass, sport!!Apparently you are refusing to read what the Constitution says.There is no favor required to be earned. The Senate has a Constitutional requirement to fulfill. If Grassley and McConnell don't do their required duties under the Constitution and defiantly refuse to carryout their sworn responsibilities, then they should be impeached, tried and thrown out of the office of trust they hold.Obama will be denied a hearing on his SCOTUS nomination, period. The lawless punk hasn't earned any favors from the GOP senate.
If Obama is lawless as you and others so vehemently affirm, then why the Hell haven't the House and Senate done the same to him? Again, they're not carrying out their Constitutional responsibilities.
Your bitching about one and not about the other smacks of bloody partisan hypocrisy!
Biden read it.
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
Remarks by Joe Biden in 1992 have somehow mystically and magically become law, USSC precedent and/or a Senate Rule? Can you cite the Title, Chapter and Section in the US Code where that is codified or became law and legal precedent by citing the SCOTUS case in which that was established OR the Senate Rule? No, you can't because you are in gross error and being a GOP lemming parroting the party line from The Minders!
You also assert that the, "The Constitution clearly states the Senate the has the last word on any SCJ nomination...." It is the President who actually has the last word regarding SCOTUS by actually making the appointment with the Senate in an intermediate role with only the power to give advice and to consent or withhold their consent through the Constitutional process in Article II, § 2, Clause 2, your errors notwithstanding!
The "advice and consent" clause is a de facto check and balance on the process as conceived by the Framers of the Constitution, and was not envisioned to be used as political tool so one corrupt faction can dominate and run the clock until a more favorable time, betting on the come!
Obama will be denied and there's not a damn thing Democrats can do about it, especially since they themselves have advocated for the exact same thing when a Republican was president.
We GOP obstructed, dear, and now we are paying the price for it.The Democrats conducted hearings and confirmed conservative judges Scalia, Thomas and Alito while a Republican was presidentAgain Mr. Know-It-All, a second read for you. You really shouldn't let your big mouth overload your fat ass, sport!!Apparently you are refusing to read what the Constitution says.There is no favor required to be earned. The Senate has a Constitutional requirement to fulfill. If Grassley and McConnell don't do their required duties under the Constitution and defiantly refuse to carryout their sworn responsibilities, then they should be impeached, tried and thrown out of the office of trust they hold.
If Obama is lawless as you and others so vehemently affirm, then why the Hell haven't the House and Senate done the same to him? Again, they're not carrying out their Constitutional responsibilities.
Your bitching about one and not about the other smacks of bloody partisan hypocrisy!
Biden read it.
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
Remarks by Joe Biden in 1992 have somehow mystically and magically become law, USSC precedent and/or a Senate Rule? Can you cite the Title, Chapter and Section in the US Code where that is codified or became law and legal precedent by citing the SCOTUS case in which that was established OR the Senate Rule? No, you can't because you are in gross error and being a GOP lemming parroting the party line from The Minders!
You also assert that the, "The Constitution clearly states the Senate the has the last word on any SCJ nomination...." It is the President who actually has the last word regarding SCOTUS by actually making the appointment with the Senate in an intermediate role with only the power to give advice and to consent or withhold their consent through the Constitutional process in Article II, § 2, Clause 2, your errors notwithstanding!
The "advice and consent" clause is a de facto check and balance on the process as conceived by the Framers of the Constitution, and was not envisioned to be used as political tool so one corrupt faction can dominate and run the clock until a more favorable time, betting on the come!
Obama will be denied and there's not a damn thing Democrats can do about it, especially since they themselves have advocated for the exact same thing when a Republican was president.
Payback is a bitch. If Obama hadn't spent the last 7 years being a jackass maybe the GOP would have worked with him on this.
Is Horseshit one word or is Horse Shit two words?The Democrats conducted hearings and confirmed conservative judges Scalia, Thomas and Alito while a Republican was presidentAgain Mr. Know-It-All, a second read for you. You really shouldn't let your big mouth overload your fat ass, sport!!Apparently you are refusing to read what the Constitution says.There is no favor required to be earned. The Senate has a Constitutional requirement to fulfill. If Grassley and McConnell don't do their required duties under the Constitution and defiantly refuse to carryout their sworn responsibilities, then they should be impeached, tried and thrown out of the office of trust they hold.
If Obama is lawless as you and others so vehemently affirm, then why the Hell haven't the House and Senate done the same to him? Again, they're not carrying out their Constitutional responsibilities.
Your bitching about one and not about the other smacks of bloody partisan hypocrisy!
Biden read it.
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
Remarks by Joe Biden in 1992 have somehow mystically and magically become law, USSC precedent and/or a Senate Rule? Can you cite the Title, Chapter and Section in the US Code where that is codified or became law and legal precedent by citing the SCOTUS case in which that was established OR the Senate Rule? No, you can't because you are in gross error and being a GOP lemming parroting the party line from The Minders!
You also assert that the, "The Constitution clearly states the Senate the has the last word on any SCJ nomination...." It is the President who actually has the last word regarding SCOTUS by actually making the appointment with the Senate in an intermediate role with only the power to give advice and to consent or withhold their consent through the Constitutional process in Article II, § 2, Clause 2, your errors notwithstanding!
The "advice and consent" clause is a de facto check and balance on the process as conceived by the Framers of the Constitution, and was not envisioned to be used as political tool so one corrupt faction can dominate and run the clock until a more favorable time, betting on the come!
Obama will be denied and there's not a damn thing Democrats can do about it, especially since they themselves have advocated for the exact same thing when a Republican was president.
Payback is a bitch. If Obama hadn't spent the last 7 years being a jackass maybe the GOP would have worked with him on this.
Yes...because Republicans bent over backwards to make Obama a one term presidentThe Democrats conducted hearings and confirmed conservative judges Scalia, Thomas and Alito while a Republican was presidentAgain Mr. Know-It-All, a second read for you. You really shouldn't let your big mouth overload your fat ass, sport!!Apparently you are refusing to read what the Constitution says.There is no favor required to be earned. The Senate has a Constitutional requirement to fulfill. If Grassley and McConnell don't do their required duties under the Constitution and defiantly refuse to carryout their sworn responsibilities, then they should be impeached, tried and thrown out of the office of trust they hold.
If Obama is lawless as you and others so vehemently affirm, then why the Hell haven't the House and Senate done the same to him? Again, they're not carrying out their Constitutional responsibilities.
Your bitching about one and not about the other smacks of bloody partisan hypocrisy!
Biden read it.
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
Remarks by Joe Biden in 1992 have somehow mystically and magically become law, USSC precedent and/or a Senate Rule? Can you cite the Title, Chapter and Section in the US Code where that is codified or became law and legal precedent by citing the SCOTUS case in which that was established OR the Senate Rule? No, you can't because you are in gross error and being a GOP lemming parroting the party line from The Minders!
You also assert that the, "The Constitution clearly states the Senate the has the last word on any SCJ nomination...." It is the President who actually has the last word regarding SCOTUS by actually making the appointment with the Senate in an intermediate role with only the power to give advice and to consent or withhold their consent through the Constitutional process in Article II, § 2, Clause 2, your errors notwithstanding!
The "advice and consent" clause is a de facto check and balance on the process as conceived by the Framers of the Constitution, and was not envisioned to be used as political tool so one corrupt faction can dominate and run the clock until a more favorable time, betting on the come!
Obama will be denied and there's not a damn thing Democrats can do about it, especially since they themselves have advocated for the exact same thing when a Republican was president.
Payback is a bitch. If Obama hadn't spent the last 7 years being a jackass maybe the GOP would have worked with him on this.
Conservatives have held the court since the 70sThe problem is that part of our GOP believe we are entitled to a Permanent Majority, forgetting we are a two party government and consensus & compromise works better than unbending party ideology.
"(Merrick) Garland was born on November 13, 1952 in Chicago, Illinois.[2] He was raised in the Chicago area,[3] in the northern suburb of Lincolnwood.[4]This should be rich.
Lemme guess - a fucking Liberal bull-dyke with a dyke spike, a gut, and an attitude. Of course, she'll have military experience. That'll be the big highlight. She spent four years munching carpet in the barracks at some Air Farce base, bringing hard-working servicemen up on charges of "sexual assault."
"Garland's mother Shirley (née Horwitz) was a director of volunteer services at Chicago's Council for Jewish Elderly; his father, Cyril Garland, headed Garland Advertising, a small business run out of the family's home.[5][6][3][7]
"Garland was raised as a Jew.[7]
"His grandparents left the Pale of Settlement in the early 20th century, fleeing anti-Semitism and seeking a better life for their children in the United States."
Merrick Garland - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
What do you seek?
A reward?
Good
Happy to oblige
Bend over bitch
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
and yet never done it.Again Mr. Know-It-All, a second read for you. You really shouldn't let your big mouth overload your fat ass, sport!!Apparently you are refusing to read what the Constitution says.There is no favor required to be earned. The Senate has a Constitutional requirement to fulfill. If Grassley and McConnell don't do their required duties under the Constitution and defiantly refuse to carryout their sworn responsibilities, then they should be impeached, tried and thrown out of the office of trust they hold.Obama will be denied a hearing on his SCOTUS nomination, period. The lawless punk hasn't earned any favors from the GOP senate.
If Obama is lawless as you and others so vehemently affirm, then why the Hell haven't the House and Senate done the same to him? Again, they're not carrying out their Constitutional responsibilities.
Your bitching about one and not about the other smacks of bloody partisan hypocrisy!
Biden read it.
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
Remarks by Joe Biden in 1992 have somehow mystically and magically become law, USSC precedent and/or a Senate Rule? Can you cite the Title, Chapter and Section in the US Code where that is codified or became law and legal precedent by citing the SCOTUS case in which that was established OR the Senate Rule? No, you can't because you are in gross error and being a GOP lemming parroting the party line from The Minders!
You also assert that the, "The Constitution clearly states the Senate the has the last word on any SCJ nomination...." It is the President who actually has the last word regarding SCOTUS by actually making the appointment with the Senate in an intermediate role with only the power to give advice and to consent or withhold their consent through the Constitutional process in Article II, § 2, Clause 2, your errors notwithstanding!
The "advice and consent" clause is a de facto check and balance on the process as conceived by the Framers of the Constitution, and was not envisioned to be used as political tool so one corrupt faction can dominate and run the clock until a more favorable time, betting on the come!
Obama will be denied and there's not a damn thing Democrats can do about it, especially since they themselves have advocated for the exact same thing when a Republican was president.
Obama should have just exhumed Liberace and appointed his dead, gay ass.
Obama should have just exhumed Liberace and appointed his dead, gay ass.
^
Asshole.
