Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'll direct you to investigate the senate's own rules for the process.
Witty relevant cartoons.
I'd be glad to explain the part you didn't grasp.
You need to look up the words "witty" and "consent." They don't mean what you think they mean. And if you really are an "old" gringo, you are one strange, immature old man.
That isn't the same thing, a Supreme Court Nominee is a bit more important that stupid bills trying to defund ACA.
But don't worry, McConnell will cave once the pressure increases and he begins to worry that this might cost Republicans elections. While you don't understand this, that is what we call playing politics.
No it won't. How many people can even name the justices on the Supreme Court? 10% of the population? If that?
Weird, what "tears of despair?" The only thing I see in this thread is right wingers desperate that McConnell will hold out until January 2017 before allowing any hearings for a Supreme Court nominee from Bernie or Hillary, or maybe from Obama in December 2016.
Granted he first has to hold out until then, and there are lots of things the Democrats can do to put pressure on McConnell. Besides, holding out is only helping the Democrats and making it easier for the Supreme Court to vote on things Scalia would have voted against.
You really think that Bernie Sander is going to be the president? I mean, seriously?
You were always going to find a reason to vote for the Democrat nominee. If it wasn't this, it would have been some other perceived slight.
The fact that the GOP makes people like you angry is one good reason for vote straight ticket GOP. Think I'll do it again.
1. "you were always..."
You don't know a damn thing about this person, or what they will or will not do. The arrogance you display in presuming you do is overwhelming.
2. I hear a lot about how Obama has divided the country. I reject that assertion. When you frame discussions, pitting "us" vs. "them", when you talk about "our team" vs. "their team (WTH is this, are we playing effing football now?); when you frame the discussion in such a hateful, divisive, polarizing manner, it's you who seek to divide. Obama has f--k all to do with it.
Democrats: "Wah... wah... WAH!!!... The Republicans can't do what WE did! It's not F-A-I-R!!! WAAAAAAAHHH!!!... "
Fast-forward to Republicans whining, "WAH WAH WAH!!!! Why'd we follow McConnell?!??!?!?"
Besides, you're really helping us on some key cases like ABORTION. Good job!!!!!
Go ahead - keep waving that victory flag!!! In an election year no less......
Quote:
The last time the justices heard a major challenge on abortion rights was in 2007, when the Court upheld the federal Partial-Birth Abortion Act in Gonzalez v. Carhart. Since then, the political fight over abortion access has changed significantly. Over the past half decade, states have been steadily limiting and complicating access to abortion services through incremental legislation. These new restrictions began after the 2010 midterm elections, which saw Republican victories in statehouses across the country. Restrictions tend to follow similar patterns, echoing those introduced in H.B. 2, and they all make small but meaningful changes to the way abortions have to be administered and clinics have to operate.
“This is one of the issues that conservatives need to be focusing on deciding how we approach the Supreme Court vacancy,” said Texas state Rep. Jeff Leach, a Plano Republican who co-sponsored the 2013 Texas law at issue.
And poor, poor Dow decided to cough up $835 million.
Quote:
“Growing political uncertainties due to recent events with the Supreme Court and increased likelihood for unfavorable outcomes for business involved in class-action suits have changed Dow’s risk assessment of the situation,” the company told Bloomberg News. The case reveals how corporations have used the conservative majority on the court as a safety valve to nullify unfavorable rulings. As the Alliance for Justice has documented, time and again, the Roberts Court has issued 5-4 rulings that protect big corporations from liability, limit access to justice for workers and consumers, and allow companies to evade regulations on the environment, racial and gender discrimination, and monopolistic practices.
you're really helping us on some key cases like ABORTION. Good job!!!!!
No one has even expressed a remote interest in reversing Roe v Wade. What are you inanely babbling about?
See... that's the problem with not keeping up on what's going on in the real world.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Maybe take yourself a little more seriously?
