Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

51 votes is better. President picks. Senate advises and consents.* That's how the system is supposed to work. As long as Trump doesn't nominate a penguin, his pick should get approved. Enough with the stupid games.

 

*except in undefined periods in which the Senate need not advise or consent.

Merrick Garland agrees with you.

 

Just because Reid changed the rules doesn't mean the Republicans have to do it. But of course they will. And they could change the rules even if Reid didn't, so it's a moot point.

  • Replies 2.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted

Merrick Garland agrees with you.

 

Just because Reid changed the rules doesn't mean the Republicans have to do it. But of course they will. And they could change the rules even if Reid didn't, so it's a moot point.

 

No it isn't actually. You didn't criticize Reid when he did it and now you're criticizing the Republicans when they take advantage of rules that were changed when they weren't in power.

 

That's what makes you a blind partisan idiot.

Posted

Just because Reid changed the rules doesn't mean the Republicans have to do it.

 

No. It just means that when Ted Cruz gets a lifetime seat to SCOTUS from 51 Senate votes, you address your thank-you note correctly.

Posted

 

No. It just means that when Ted Cruz gets a lifetime seat to SCOTUS from 51 Senate votes, you address your thank-you note correctly.

Ted Cruz would not get confirmed with 51 votes.

Posted

No it isn't actually. You didn't criticize Reid when he did it and now you're criticizing the Republicans when they take advantage of rules that were changed when they weren't in power.

 

That's what makes you a blind partisan idiot.

Speaking of blind, when did I criticize the Republicans? I just stated the fact that they could prove they're more ethical than Reid by not doing it, but I suspect they won't. And they could change the rule back if they thought it was wrong. Just like the criticism they had for Obama using executive orders, but now it's OK.

Posted

Speaking of blind, when did I criticize the Republicans? I just stated the fact that they could prove they're more ethical than Reid by not doing it, but I suspect they won't. And they could change the rule back if they thought it was wrong. Just like the criticism they had for Obama using executive orders, but now it's OK.

 

Since when are people ethical? What planet are you visiting from?

Posted

 

Does Debbie Wasserman Schultz even have a law degree?

:lol:

Speaking of blind, when did I criticize the Republicans? I just stated the fact that they could prove they're more ethical than Reid by not doing it, but I suspect they won't. And they could change the rule back if they thought it was wrong. Just like the criticism they had for Obama using executive orders, but now it's OK.

I'd like to see the return of the 60 vote threshold along with Senators from both parties voting based on the merit of bills or appointees rather than strict partisan party lines. Unfortunately the chances of us seeing much less partisanship are about none.

Posted

Speaking of blind, when did I criticize the Republicans? I just stated the fact that they could prove they're more ethical than Reid by not doing it, but I suspect they won't. And they could change the rule back if they thought it was wrong. Just like the criticism they had for Obama using executive orders, but now it's OK.

 

Of course they won't. We've had this childish one-upmanship of "Who's the bigger crybabies" going on in Congress for better than two decades now. It sure as hell isn't going to stop now. It won't stop when the Democrats next control Congress, either.

 

And I'm not sure which is scarier. Republicans pull this **** out of childish petulance. Democrats pull this **** out of an honest belief that people who disagree with them don't deserve a voice.

Posted

you havebeen ffunny of recent dnus kdbt verah gods

 

Are you genuinely in such a hurry to post that you can't even bother to check that your sentences include actual words?

Posted

 

Are you genuinely in such a hurry to post that you can't even bother to check that your sentences include actual words?

no. Well not always, some times I do it to !@#$ with tibs or eii.

 

Right now I'm on an elliptical. Other times i may be tractoring.

I did that on purpose at theend .

Posted

 

You're posting on a message board while on an elliptical?

 

How long have you had a membership to Curves?

gotta get the cardio in.

 

You're posting on a message board while on an elliptical?

 

How long have you had a membership to Curves?

hottie in tight see thru black yoga pants 5' from me on hands and knees. Curves is great
Posted

Monday Night Massacre. Trump fired the acting attorney general because she didn't agree that the immigration exectutive order was constitutional and wouldn't enforce it. So now standing up for the constitution is grounds for dismissal.

 

Trump is starting to make Nixon seem rational.

Posted

Monday Night Massacre. Trump fired the acting attorney general because she didn't agree that the immigration exectutive order was constitutional and wouldn't enforce it. So now standing up for the constitution is grounds for dismissal.

Trump is starting to make Nixon seem rational.

Ridiculous.

Posted

Monday Night Massacre. Trump fired the acting attorney general because she didn't agree that the immigration exectutive order was constitutional and wouldn't enforce it. So now standing up for the constitution is grounds for dismissal.

Trump is starting to make Nixon seem rational.

Remember when the Tsarnaevs were on the watch list but weren't watched due to "xenophobia".

 

That was cool when we let them bomb the marathon.

×
×
  • Create New...