What's wrong with the GOP? Vote on Supreme Court Justice

[kaz]

Outside the beltway, no one knows or cares about this. The Republicans shouldn't do it for the same reason the Democrats wouldn't have done it in 1992. You can ask Biden to explain that to you.

You getting your game on and getting ready to call me a "Republican" again to insult me? LOL

Perhaps if you read more than the conservative news headlines you'd gain an objective view and an accurate analysis of the situation. Here are the FACTS from JUNE 1992:
1. There were no Supreme Court vacancies.
2. Clinton had just won the nomination to take on Bush. The right could smell the defeat coming
3. There was talk about getting an older justice to retire so Bush could appoint a new one before he was out of office.
4. Bush was running for reelection, which would have intertwined this whole process right in the middle of the election.
4. Bidden's statement was under these circumstances trying to avoid the political manipulation of the appointment of a SC justice in the middle of an election.

Prove me wrong.
It's apples and oranges. How stupid does the GOP think we are using this as a talking point?

Yet you know that's specifically what he was referring to when he just said there shouldn't be any nominee, got it. You'll make up whatever shit you can for the Democrats.

BTW, HW would have won easily if Perot hadn't run, so that's ridiculous that he knew Democrats would win.

You got any more shit you want to make up?

I didn't make anything up. Smelling defeat was opinion, but regardless, They wanted to hedge their bets. The situation was regarding retiring a justice to replace that justice... This is an opening due to death. Why are you defending the hold out and how do you justify it? Why not just vote?

You're making up all this shit that Biden didn't say. He put no conditions on it, he said no Republican should be submitted and if one is the Democrats wouldn't vote on it

Sorry, so what's your rationale for the hold out again? Besides, Biden said so?

I don't want another Marxist on the Supreme court. If we wait until after the election, we'll probably get one, but if we do it now, we definitely will.

Republicans over and over fall for Lucy pulling the ball out from under them. They should do it because they can and the Democrats would and in the future the Democrats will regardless of what they do now

 

[Slade3200]

Perhaps if you read more than the conservative news headlines you'd gain an objective view and an accurate analysis of the situation. Here are the FACTS from JUNE 1992:
1. There were no Supreme Court vacancies.
2. Clinton had just won the nomination to take on Bush. The right could smell the defeat coming
3. There was talk about getting an older justice to retire so Bush could appoint a new one before he was out of office.
4. Bush was running for reelection, which would have intertwined this whole process right in the middle of the election.
4. Bidden's statement was under these circumstances trying to avoid the political manipulation of the appointment of a SC justice in the middle of an election.

Prove me wrong.
It's apples and oranges. How stupid does the GOP think we are using this as a talking point?

Yet you know that's specifically what he was referring to when he just said there shouldn't be any nominee, got it. You'll make up whatever shit you can for the Democrats.

BTW, HW would have won easily if Perot hadn't run, so that's ridiculous that he knew Democrats would win.

You got any more shit you want to make up?

I didn't make anything up. Smelling defeat was opinion, but regardless, They wanted to hedge their bets. The situation was regarding retiring a justice to replace that justice... This is an opening due to death. Why are you defending the hold out and how do you justify it? Why not just vote?

You're making up all this shit that Biden didn't say. He put no conditions on it, he said no Republican should be submitted and if one is the Democrats wouldn't vote on it

Sorry, so what's your rationale for the hold out again? Besides, Biden said so?

I don't want another Marxist on the Supreme court. If we wait until after the election, we'll probably get one, but if we do it now, we definitely will.

Republicans over and over fall for Lucy pulling the ball out from under them. They should do it because they can and the Democrats would and in the future the Democrats will regardless of what they do now

Then vote NO... Not even considering is partisan bullshit and it sounds like you know it

 

[kaz]

Yet you know that's specifically what he was referring to when he just said there shouldn't be any nominee, got it. You'll make up whatever shit you can for the Democrats.

BTW, HW would have won easily if Perot hadn't run, so that's ridiculous that he knew Democrats would win.

You got any more shit you want to make up?

I didn't make anything up. Smelling defeat was opinion, but regardless, They wanted to hedge their bets. The situation was regarding retiring a justice to replace that justice... This is an opening due to death. Why are you defending the hold out and how do you justify it? Why not just vote?

You're making up all this shit that Biden didn't say. He put no conditions on it, he said no Republican should be submitted and if one is the Democrats wouldn't vote on it

Sorry, so what's your rationale for the hold out again? Besides, Biden said so?

I don't want another Marxist on the Supreme court. If we wait until after the election, we'll probably get one, but if we do it now, we definitely will.

Republicans over and over fall for Lucy pulling the ball out from under them. They should do it because they can and the Democrats would and in the future the Democrats will regardless of what they do now

Then vote NO... Not even considering is partisan bullshit and it sounds like you know it

I just said it was partisan, Charlie chan

 

[Slade3200]

I didn't make anything up. Smelling defeat was opinion, but regardless, They wanted to hedge their bets. The situation was regarding retiring a justice to replace that justice... This is an opening due to death. Why are you defending the hold out and how do you justify it? Why not just vote?

You're making up all this shit that Biden didn't say. He put no conditions on it, he said no Republican should be submitted and if one is the Democrats wouldn't vote on it

Sorry, so what's your rationale for the hold out again? Besides, Biden said so?

I don't want another Marxist on the Supreme court. If we wait until after the election, we'll probably get one, but if we do it now, we definitely will.

Republicans over and over fall for Lucy pulling the ball out from under them. They should do it because they can and the Democrats would and in the future the Democrats will regardless of what they do now

Then vote NO... Not even considering is partisan bullshit and it sounds like you know it

I just said it was partisan, Charlie chan

Good then we agree... can we also agree that it is BullShit?

 

[AvgGuyIA]

Give it a freaking chance. Hussein only nominated him the day before yesterday. On the surface it seems that the judge might be a moderate but rumors persist that he holds unconstitutional personal bias against the 2nd Amendment. Let it play out.

. Its not a rumor. He prevented DC residents from owning guns and had to be overruled by the Supreme Court he wants to sit on. Ain't no fucken way a liberal will replace the greatest conservative Jurist ever to hold the position.

 

[AvgGuyIA]

Give it a freaking chance. Hussein only nominated him the day before yesterday. On the surface it seems that the judge might be a moderate but rumors persist that he holds unconstitutional personal bias against the 2nd Amendment. Let it play out.

I hope it plays out and congress does their job. I've been shaking my head for weeks at this posturing by the GOP to not even consider a nominee. It blows my mind and I still haven't heard a sensible justification.

GOP is following the Biden rule. We have video with Joe's explanation.

 

[Slade3200]

Give it a freaking chance. Hussein only nominated him the day before yesterday. On the surface it seems that the judge might be a moderate but rumors persist that he holds unconstitutional personal bias against the 2nd Amendment. Let it play out.

I hope it plays out and congress does their job. I've been shaking my head for weeks at this posturing by the GOP to not even consider a nominee. It blows my mind and I still haven't heard a sensible justification.

GOP is following the Biden rule. We have video with Joe's explanation.

I already addressed this in an earlier post... It is not justification:

1. Trying to expose hypocrisy because the other side did it in the past doesn't justify or excuse problematic actions from your party. So what if the left did it? That doesn't give you a pass to do it. They teach us this principle in elementary school.

2. Biden was referring to a totally different situation that involved coordinating a Justice to retire at the end of a presidential term so that president could replace him with a like minded candidate. He was trying to block political manipulation of the system. This is a different case then this vacancy that was cause because of a death.

The pundants and politicians are totally politicizing this situation... Its an embarrassment.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Because they don't have to.

 

[Slade3200]

Give it a freaking chance. Hussein only nominated him the day before yesterday. On the surface it seems that the judge might be a moderate but rumors persist that he holds unconstitutional personal bias against the 2nd Amendment. Let it play out.

I hope it plays out and congress does their job. I've been shaking my head for weeks at this posturing by the GOP to not even consider a nominee. It blows my mind and I still haven't heard a sensible justification.

GOP is following the Biden rule. We have video with Joe's explanation.

Furthermore...

Here are the FACTS from JUNE 1992:
1. There were no Supreme Court vacancies.
2. Clinton had just won the nomination to take on Bush.
3. There was talk about getting an older justice to retire so Bush could appoint a new one before he was out of office.
4. Bush was running for reelection, which would have intertwined this whole process right in the middle of the election.
5. Bidden's statement was under these circumstances, and it's pretty obvious he was trying to avoid the political manipulation of the appointment of a SC justice in the middle of an election.

Prove me wrong.
It's apples and oranges. How stupid does the GOP think we are using this as a talking point?

 

[regent]

Wont be long until the Republicans refuse to vote for a Justice in a president's first term.

 

[Preacher]

I have yet to hear a non-political non-BS reason for the GOP's hold out from meeting and voting on a Supreme Court Nominee. If there was a president Trump and the same situation presented itself in 4 years is there any doubt that they would flip a 180 and support a vote for the nominee??

If the GOP doesn't like the nominated justice then they can simply vote NO. The gridlock is ridiculous and the source for much frustration from Americans... Why can't they just do their jobs?

2 reasons

1. He is a jew,Jews DO NOT represent the MAJORITY of America and have no right to dictate policy
2. He is an anti gun nut and by that token anti constitution.

I hope the GOP keeps stone walling.

 

[Redfish]

Obama will be denied the opportunity to put another justice on the SCOTUS, he could nominate God and it will be request denied, out of spite!

I agree, spite is the purpose behind the stand off... Not this "Leave it up to the people" BS. This attitude is whats spinning our government down the drain.

grow up, if the parties were reversed the dems would be doing the exact same thing, they have in the past.

this is much ado about nothing. Why waste time with hearings when the results of the vote are already known?

 

[Slade3200]

I have yet to hear a non-political non-BS reason for the GOP's hold out from meeting and voting on a Supreme Court Nominee. If there was a president Trump and the same situation presented itself in 4 years is there any doubt that they would flip a 180 and support a vote for the nominee??

If the GOP doesn't like the nominated justice then they can simply vote NO. The gridlock is ridiculous and the source for much frustration from Americans... Why can't they just do their jobs?

2 reasons

1. He is a jew,Jews DO NOT represent the MAJORITY of America and have no right to dictate policy
2. He is an anti gun nut and by that token anti constitution.

I hope the GOP keeps stone walling.

Why not just vote NO... Thats a stronger statement isn't it?

 

[IsaacNewton]

Then the Democrats should simply deny every Republican president, if there ever is one again, appointing anyone to the Supreme Court. I say give the Republicans what they appear to want. Shut all Republicans down starting today and never let them appoint anyone.

There you go, all equal now.

 

[Slade3200]

Obama will be denied the opportunity to put another justice on the SCOTUS, he could nominate God and it will be request denied, out of spite!

I agree, spite is the purpose behind the stand off... Not this "Leave it up to the people" BS. This attitude is whats spinning our government down the drain.

grow up, if the parties were reversed the dems would be doing the exact same thing, they have in the past.

this is much ado about nothing. Why waste time with hearings when the results of the vote are already known?

If the dems were doing this i'd still be talking out... Washington needs to do their job. Thats my point

 

[eagle7_31]

Give it a freaking chance. Hussein only nominated him the day before yesterday. On the surface it seems that the judge might be a moderate but rumors persist that he holds unconstitutional personal bias against the 2nd Amendment. Let it play out.

I hope it plays out and congress does their job. I've been shaking my head for weeks at this posturing by the GOP to not even consider a nominee. It blows my mind and I still haven't heard a sensible justification.

GOP is following the Biden rule. We have video with Joe's explanation.

Furthermore...

Here are the FACTS from JUNE 1992:
1. There were no Supreme Court vacancies.
2. Clinton had just won the nomination to take on Bush.
3. There was talk about getting an older justice to retire so Bush could appoint a new one before he was out of office.
4. Bush was running for reelection, which would have intertwined this whole process right in the middle of the election.
5. Bidden's statement was under these circumstances, and it's pretty obvious he was trying to avoid the political manipulation of the appointment of a SC justice in the middle of an election.

Prove me wrong.
It's apples and oranges. How stupid does the GOP think we are using this as a talking point?

In other words, do as the Democrats say, not as they do. got it. Also Obama and the media are trying to pass Garland off as a 'centrist'. He's not, he is just like the other 4 liberals on the USSC. BO as usual is being more than a bit inaccurate.

 

[Slade3200]

It's interesting that nobody here has backed up with the GOP congress is saying all over the airwaves... "The people should make this choice". Between that and the bogus Biden argument, they are just sounding like dishonest idiots

 

[Slade3200]

Give it a freaking chance. Hussein only nominated him the day before yesterday. On the surface it seems that the judge might be a moderate but rumors persist that he holds unconstitutional personal bias against the 2nd Amendment. Let it play out.

I hope it plays out and congress does their job. I've been shaking my head for weeks at this posturing by the GOP to not even consider a nominee. It blows my mind and I still haven't heard a sensible justification.

GOP is following the Biden rule. We have video with Joe's explanation.

Furthermore...

Here are the FACTS from JUNE 1992:
1. There were no Supreme Court vacancies.
2. Clinton had just won the nomination to take on Bush.
3. There was talk about getting an older justice to retire so Bush could appoint a new one before he was out of office.
4. Bush was running for reelection, which would have intertwined this whole process right in the middle of the election.
5. Bidden's statement was under these circumstances, and it's pretty obvious he was trying to avoid the political manipulation of the appointment of a SC justice in the middle of an election.

Prove me wrong.
It's apples and oranges. How stupid does the GOP think we are using this as a talking point?

In other words, do as the Democrats say, not as they do. got it. Also Obama and the media are trying to pass Garland off as a 'centrist'. He's not, he is just like the other 4 liberals on the USSC. BO as usual is being more than a bit inaccurate.

Who the judge is makes no difference... They should vote.

 

[Preacher]

I have yet to hear a non-political non-BS reason for the GOP's hold out from meeting and voting on a Supreme Court Nominee. If there was a president Trump and the same situation presented itself in 4 years is there any doubt that they would flip a 180 and support a vote for the nominee??

If the GOP doesn't like the nominated justice then they can simply vote NO. The gridlock is ridiculous and the source for much frustration from Americans... Why can't they just do their jobs?

2 reasons

1. He is a jew,Jews DO NOT represent the MAJORITY of America and have no right to dictate policy
2. He is an anti gun nut and by that token anti constitution.

I hope the GOP keeps stone walling.

Why not just vote NO... Thats a stronger statement isn't it?

Can't take chance of some RINO'S voting yes....what ya gonna do then? Can't impeach him. I prefer just stonewalling him.

 

[eagle7_31]

Then the Democrats should simply deny every Republican president, if there ever is one again, appointing anyone to the Supreme Court. I say give the Republicans what they appear to want. Shut all Republicans down starting today and never let them appoint anyone.

There you go, all equal now.

Not in a presidential election year no. And yes that goes for both parties. If the Hildebeast wins, let her put Garland then. Also quit trying to pass Garland off as a moderate. He is a liberal like the other 4 libs on the court now.