Democrats to fillibuster Gorsuch - bunch of cry babies

[Soul Crusher]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/powerpost/gorsuch-confirmation-hearing-to-focus-today-on-testimony-from-friends-foes/2017/03/23/14d21116-0fc7-11e7-9d5a-a83e627dc120_story.html?utm_term=.fcd23eccf12a&wpisrc=al_alert-COMBO-politics%252Bnation&wpmk=1

[Vince G, CSN MFT]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/powerpost/gorsuch-confirmation-hearing-to-focus-today-on-testimony-from-friends-foes/2017/03/23/14d21116-0fc7-11e7-9d5a-a83e627dc120_story.html?utm_term=.fcd23eccf12a&wpisrc=al_alert-COMBO-politics%252Bnation&wpmk=1

Yet, you give the GOP a pass for not allowing Obama to rightfully select his pick.....

[andreisdaman]

Yet, you give the GOP a pass for not allowing Obama to rightfully select his pick.....

talking common sense to SC is a waste of time..his hypocrisy knows no bounds

[Soul Crusher]

So what is the point?  Not nominate anyone?   See how that works when its libfags back in office.   

[Dos Equis]

Yet, you give the GOP a pass for not allowing Obama to rightfully select his pick.....

Obama did nominate his pick. 

[Dos Equis]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/powerpost/gorsuch-confirmation-hearing-to-focus-today-on-testimony-from-friends-foes/2017/03/23/14d21116-0fc7-11e7-9d5a-a83e627dc120_story.html?utm_term=.fcd23eccf12a&wpisrc=al_alert-COMBO-politics%252Bnation&wpmk=1

Dumb move. 

[Soul Crusher]

Yet, you give the GOP a pass for not allowing Obama to rightfully select his pick.....

Too little too late for O-fag. 

[Vince G, CSN MFT]

Obama did nominate his pick. 

And the GOP blocked the vote...didnt even give him the opportunity to go to a hearing.   This is rightful payback

[Dos Equis]

And the GOP blocked the vote...didnt even give him the opportunity to go to a hearing.   This is rightful payback

They did the right thing.  And there isn't any payback, because all McConnell has to do is use the "nuclear option" and Gorsuch will be confirmed with a simple majority.  It's really just a whole lot of partisan noise and crying that will not amount to anything. 

They should have saved their fight for Ginsburg's replacement. 

[TuHolmes]

They did the right thing.  And there isn't any payback, because all McConnell has to do is use the "nuclear option" and Gorsuch will be confirmed with a simple majority.  It's really just a whole lot of partisan noise and crying that will not amount to anything. 

They should have saved their fight for Ginsburg's replacement. 

I dunno. I feel that there was plenty of time to vote on an Obama nominee.

Nothing wrong with Gorsuch at all, but I don't think they should have not held a vote. The time that this took to get anyone to a vote is pretty unprecedented.

I do feel Obama's pick should have had hearings and a vote at least. Then if blocked, they can say they weren't obstructionist.

Surely the GOP was being so in not evening calling for a vote for the Obama nominee.

[Straw Man]

They did the right thing.  And there isn't any payback, because all McConnell has to do is use the "nuclear option" and Gorsuch will be confirmed with a simple majority.  It's really just a whole lot of partisan noise and crying that will not amount to anything. 

They should have saved their fight for Ginsburg's replacement. 

Bullshit

Republican violated their oath office by denying the sitting POTUS and the people who put him in office SCOTUS nominee

It was pure politics

Ted Cruz was talking about denying Hillary any nominees suggesting we don't need 9 justices
http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/sented-cruz-supreme-court-justice-hillary-clinton/2016/10/26/id/755503/

what the Republican did was dereliction of duty

[Yamcha]

Bullshit

Republican violated their oath office by denying the sitting POTUS and the people who put him in office SCOTUS nominee

It was pure politics

Ted Cruz was talking about denying Hillary any nominees suggesting we don't need 9 justices
http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/sented-cruz-supreme-court-justice-hillary-clinton/2016/10/26/id/755503/

what the Republican did was dereliction of duty

"Elections have consequences."

[Straw Man]

I dunno. I feel that there was plenty of time to vote on an Obama nominee.

Nothing wrong with Gorsuch at all, but I don't think they should have not held a vote. The time that this took to get anyone to a vote is pretty unprecedented.

I do feel Obama's pick should have had hearings and a vote at least. Then if blocked, they can say they weren't obstructionist.

Surely the GOP was being so in not evening calling for a vote for the Obama nominee.

except that he's more conservative than Scalia
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2017/02/15/neil-gorsuch-could-be-the-most-conservative-justice-on-the-supreme-court/?utm_term=.a0ab984cf83a

the country is getting more liberal and the court will only be getting more conservative

[Dos Equis]

I dunno. I feel that there was plenty of time to vote on an Obama nominee.

Nothing wrong with Gorsuch at all, but I don't think they should have not held a vote. The time that this took to get anyone to a vote is pretty unprecedented.

I do feel Obama's pick should have had hearings and a vote at least. Then if blocked, they can say they weren't obstructionist.

Surely the GOP was being so in not evening calling for a vote for the Obama nominee.

Actually my understanding is it would have been unprecedented for a president leaving office soon and being replaced by the opposing party to have a Supreme Court nominee confirmed.  President Obama knew that.  He knew the nomination was DOA in the Senate.  

Pulling back all the layers, this was really about an attempt to change the balance of the Court.  That's why you had so many liberals frothing at the mouth.  

IMO it really had nothing to do with whether Garland was qualified, deserved a vote, etc.  It was all about ideology.  

[Dos Equis]

"Elections have consequences."

Correct.  Wasn't it that great philosopher Barack who said this?   

[polychronopolous]

"Elections have consequences."

This.

The Democrats need to start winning some of these rather than getting smoked on every level.

Win a few elections and you have a voice. Until that point you are simply the 90 pound weakling getting sand kicked in his face which is obviously the case now.

[Straw Man]

Actually my understanding is it would have been unprecedented for a president leaving office soon and being replaced by the opposing party to have a Supreme Court nominee confirmed.  President Obama knew that.  He knew the nomination was DOA in the Senate.  

Pulling back all the layers, this was really about an attempt to change the balance of the Court.  That's why you had so many liberals frothing at the mouth.  

IMO it really had nothing to do with whether Garland was qualified, deserved a vote, etc.  It was all about ideology.  

No one knew that Obama was going to be replaced by an opposing party when he nominated Merrick

there is also and abundance of example of late term nominations for other judges and even a few for SCOTUS

link below will show how much Republicans blocked Obama from doing his job in his last year.

One can only hope that Dems have the same opportunity to completely shut down Trump in his last year (assuming he last that long and Dems take back control of Congress)

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/feb/14/marco-rubio/do-presidents-stop-nominating-judges-final-year/

[Dos Equis]

This.

The Democrats need to start winning some of these rather than getting smoked on every level.

Win a few elections and you have a voice. Until that point you are simply the 90 pound weakling getting sand kicked in his face which is obviously the case now.

Yep.  Obama left them quite the legacy. 

[polychronopolous]

No one knew that Obama was going to be replaced by an opposing party when he nominated Merrick

there is also and abundance of example of late term nominations for other judges and even a few for SCOTUS

link below will show how much Republicans blocked Obama from doing his job in his last year.

One can only hope that Dems have the same opportunity to completely shut down Trump in his last year (assuming he last that long and Dems take back control of Congress)

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/feb/14/marco-rubio/do-presidents-stop-nominating-judges-final-year/

[Straw Man]

good point

the districts are so gerrymandered that we'll have to wait of  the next census to try to sort it out


https://www.amazon.com/Ratf-ked-Behind-Americas-Democracy/dp/1631491628

one example of many
http://www.metrotimes.com/detroit/once-again-michigan-dems-receive-more-votes-in-the-state-house-but-republicans-hold-onto-power/Content?oid=2472685

In 2014 and 2016, Democrats received more votes or nearly split the tally in the State House races, yet Republicans hold a huge 63-47 majority and push a deeply conservative agenda that a majority of voters don't want.

How could that be? That's classic gerrymandering. As MT reported a year ago, Republicans redrew the state's 110 state legislative districts in 2010 in such a way that Democratic voters are herded into a small number of districts. The majority of Republican voters, conversely, are spread among a much larger number of districts.

Whoever controls more districts controls the House. So "packing and stacking" Democrats into a small number districts makes it easy for Republicans to hold onto power, even if Democrats get more votes statewide. And when that happens, the government passes laws that are unpopular, but it's difficult to vote Republicans out of office.

To put it bluntly, gerrymandering is a legal form of election theft, and the results support that.

[polychronopolous]

good point

the districts are so gerrymandered that we'll have to wait of  the next census to try to sort it out


https://www.amazon.com/Ratf-ked-Behind-Americas-Democracy/dp/1631491628

one example of many
http://www.metrotimes.com/detroit/once-again-michigan-dems-receive-more-votes-in-the-state-house-but-republicans-hold-onto-power/Content?oid=2472685

Nobody cares bro.

Just win a damn election for once and maybe people will begin to care about your opinion.

[HockeyFightFan]

Yep.  Obama left them quite the legacy. 

Obama's Legacy = Donald J. Trump

MAGA!!!!

[Dos Equis]

Obama's Legacy = Donald J. Trump

MAGA!!!!

Right? 

[TuHolmes]

Actually my understanding is it would have been unprecedented for a president leaving office soon and being replaced by the opposing party to have a Supreme Court nominee confirmed.  President Obama knew that.  He knew the nomination was DOA in the Senate.  

Pulling back all the layers, this was really about an attempt to change the balance of the Court.  That's why you had so many liberals frothing at the mouth.  

IMO it really had nothing to do with whether Garland was qualified, deserved a vote, etc.  It was all about ideology.  

That may be true. Sure, the nomination would be dead in the Senate, no question there, but they should have at least keep up the premise that they wouldn't obstruct the process.

I mean, we shouldn't be a nation of No No No.

The inability for the sides to work together has gotten progressively worse and the people's faith in congress has continued to drop with it.

[HockeyFightFan]

That may be true. Sure, the nomination would be dead in the Senate, no question there, but they should have at least keep up the premise that they wouldn't obstruct the process.

I mean, we shouldn't be a nation of No No No.

The inability for the sides to work together has gotten progressively worse and the people's faith in congress has continued to drop with it.

If anything has become clear in the first 60 days of Trump's administration is that every one of these pricks in the highest levels of government is a spoiled petulant child and acts only in their own interest.

Both sides of the aisle.

Fucking embarrassment to the people they are supposed to represent