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

[Vigilante]

The dip shit does not deserve to nominate anyone…

Did you know Joe Biden was a Republican?

 

[Slade3200]

I don't identify myself as a D or an R...

LOL, yeah, you do, you're completely clear. When Democrats do it, you're fine with anything. With Republican, you're fine with nothing. As I said, I agree with Biden, I agree with McConnell. Two people I almost never agree with. But Presidential Election years are not times to take up political appointments as big as the Supreme Court. A nine member politburo

I can respect your opinion although I don't agree... If that is the consensus I think it should be made a rule that all parties and presidents are bound by. If not then it should be the presidents job until his term is up.

 

[Zander]

Caterwauling. posturing, and wheezing aside, the GOP Senate is doing it's job. They do not consent. Period.

There is nothing in the COTUS that requires the Senate to approve a nominee or give them a hearing. Get over it.

 

[IsaacNewton]

Caterwauling. posturing, and wheezing aside, the GOP Senate is doing it's job. They do not consent. Period.

There is nothing in the COTUS that requires the Senate to approve a nominee or give them a hearing. Get over it.

No problem, the Democrats should never approve a judge for the Republicans either. We agree.

 

[Slade3200]

Caterwauling. posturing, and wheezing aside, the GOP Senate is doing it's job. They do not consent. Period.

There is nothing in the COTUS that requires the Senate to approve a nominee or give them a hearing. Get over it.

Maybe if Hillary gets elected they can keep that gem of an idea and hold out for 4 years until they lose another election.... Great logic!

 

[Zander]

Caterwauling. posturing, and wheezing aside, the GOP Senate is doing it's job. They do not consent. Period.

There is nothing in the COTUS that requires the Senate to approve a nominee or give them a hearing. Get over it.

Maybe if Hillary gets elected they can keep that gem of an idea and hold out for 4 years until they lose another election.... Great logic!

If they continue to control the Senate they can do that. There is nothing in the Constitution that prohibits it.

 

[Zander]

Caterwauling. posturing, and wheezing aside, the GOP Senate is doing it's job. They do not consent. Period.

There is nothing in the COTUS that requires the Senate to approve a nominee or give them a hearing. Get over it.

No problem, the Democrats should never approve a judge for the Republicans either. We agree.

Still whining?

 

[Slade3200]

Caterwauling. posturing, and wheezing aside, the GOP Senate is doing it's job. They do not consent. Period.

There is nothing in the COTUS that requires the Senate to approve a nominee or give them a hearing. Get over it.

Maybe if Hillary gets elected they can keep that gem of an idea and hold out for 4 years until they lose another election.... Great logic!

If they continue to control the Senate they can do that. There is nothing in the Constitution that prohibits it.

Brilliant... And then if the republicans get the White House the dems can do the same thing. Eventually there will be nobody left in the Supreme Court. Awesome plan man

 

[IsaacNewton]

Caterwauling. posturing, and wheezing aside, the GOP Senate is doing it's job. They do not consent. Period.

There is nothing in the COTUS that requires the Senate to approve a nominee or give them a hearing. Get over it.

No problem, the Democrats should never approve a judge for the Republicans either. We agree.

Still whining?

Ouch, that one hit a nerve didn't it. Please repeat it, I love when people can't come up with their own material.

 

[Zander]

Caterwauling. posturing, and wheezing aside, the GOP Senate is doing it's job. They do not consent. Period.

There is nothing in the COTUS that requires the Senate to approve a nominee or give them a hearing. Get over it.

Maybe if Hillary gets elected they can keep that gem of an idea and hold out for 4 years until they lose another election.... Great logic!

If they continue to control the Senate they can do that. There is nothing in the Constitution that prohibits it.

Brilliant... And then if the republicans get the White House the dems can do the same thing. Eventually there will be nobody left in the Supreme Court. Awesome plan man

Why do you hate this document?

 

[Zander]

Caterwauling. posturing, and wheezing aside, the GOP Senate is doing it's job. They do not consent. Period.

There is nothing in the COTUS that requires the Senate to approve a nominee or give them a hearing. Get over it.

No problem, the Democrats should never approve a judge for the Republicans either. We agree.

Still whining?

Ouch, that one hit a nerve didn't it. Please repeat it, I love when people can't come up with their own material.

Still whining? Get over it.

 

[IsaacNewton]

Caterwauling. posturing, and wheezing aside, the GOP Senate is doing it's job. They do not consent. Period.

There is nothing in the COTUS that requires the Senate to approve a nominee or give them a hearing. Get over it.

Maybe if Hillary gets elected they can keep that gem of an idea and hold out for 4 years until they lose another election.... Great logic!

If they continue to control the Senate they can do that. There is nothing in the Constitution that prohibits it.

Brilliant... And then if the republicans get the White House the dems can do the same thing. Eventually there will be nobody left in the Supreme Court. Awesome plan man

Why do you hate this document?

Why do you?

 

[Slade3200]

Caterwauling. posturing, and wheezing aside, the GOP Senate is doing it's job. They do not consent. Period.

There is nothing in the COTUS that requires the Senate to approve a nominee or give them a hearing. Get over it.

Maybe if Hillary gets elected they can keep that gem of an idea and hold out for 4 years until they lose another election.... Great logic!

If they continue to control the Senate they can do that. There is nothing in the Constitution that prohibits it.

Brilliant... And then if the republicans get the White House the dems can do the same thing. Eventually there will be nobody left in the Supreme Court. Awesome plan man

Why do you hate this document?

How in the wild does my comment translate to that?

 

[Redfish]

I repeat, why waste the senate's time with hearings and a vote when everyone already knows what the result will be?

if the parties were reversed, the exact same thing would be happening.

This is nothing but partisan rhetoric aimed at stirring up the ignorant on both sides.

 

[Slade3200]

I repeat, why waste the senate's time with hearings and a vote when everyone already knows what the result will be?

if the parties were reversed, the exact same thing would be happening.

This is nothing but partisan rhetoric aimed at stirring up the ignorant on both sides.

So why are we the people demanding for better than that?

 

[kaz]

I don't identify myself as a D or an R...

LOL, yeah, you do, you're completely clear. When Democrats do it, you're fine with anything. With Republican, you're fine with nothing. As I said, I agree with Biden, I agree with McConnell. Two people I almost never agree with. But Presidential Election years are not times to take up political appointments as big as the Supreme Court. A nine member politburo

I can respect your opinion although I don't agree... If that is the consensus I think it should be made a rule that all parties and presidents are bound by. If not then it should be the presidents job until his term is up.

It is clear now. The President can nominate, the Senate has advise and counsel. The Constitution doesn't dictate how that works. That Senators from either party decide not to do it during a Presidential year is pretty clear.

Again, the Supreme Court is a political appointment. The major issues they decide based on their political ideology and they ignore the law. So of course neither party wants to give the other side a Politburo seat where 9 people rewrite the law at their whim. You can't remove politics from a political lifetime dictatorial appointment

 

[kaz]

I repeat, why waste the senate's time with hearings and a vote when everyone already knows what the result will be?

if the parties were reversed, the exact same thing would be happening.

This is nothing but partisan rhetoric aimed at stirring up the ignorant on both sides.

So why are we the people demanding for better than that?

Begging the question, you haven't proven that. You mean "Democrats" are "demanding" their way, something they've repeatedly proven they wouldn't give to Republicans in reverse

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

SEN. JOE BIDEN (D-DE), Then-Judiciary Committee Chairman: "…it is my view that if a Supreme Court Justice resigns tomorrow, or within the next several weeks, or resigns at the end of the summer, President Bush should consider following the practice of a majority of his predecessors and not - and not - name a nominee until after the November election is completed." (Sen. Biden, Congressional Record, S.16316-7, 6/25/1992)

 

[kaz]

The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.'
Ronald Reagan

I can top Reagan. Liberals responding, great, help me! And they are now the majority of Americans who want to be chained to the spiraling loss of liberty and self determination, that's why we're finally falling to the endless economic malaise of the Euroweenies

 

[JQPublic1]

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.

The word you are searching for is 'consequences' as in, Obama behaves like an ass for the last 7 years and now there are consequences.

No he hasn't. He should have been an ass after all the obstructionist BS the GOP house put him and he country through. He is just too nice a guy!