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.
Being you are an expert, or think you are, Why don't YOU tell us exactly WHAT their job is?
Ever heard of something called trias politica principle or separation of powers?
The job of each branch of the government is to keep other branches in check. Part of their job and in this case is precisely doing nothing - so that they can block another nomination from the president. They are doing a great job by doing nothing - it prevents the judiciary branch from becoming too liberal. Of course, if it were Democrat controlled congress, it would prevent the judiciary branch from becoming too conservative.
That's the checks and balances of our political system.
Ever heard of something called trias politica principle or separation of powers?
The job of each branch of the government is to keep other branches in check. Part of their job and in this case is precisely doing nothing - so that they can block another nomination from the president. They are doing a great job by doing nothing - it prevents the judiciary branch from becoming too liberal. Of course, if it were Democrat controlled congress, it would prevent the judiciary branch from becoming too conservative.
That's the checks and balances of our political system.
Holding up appointments for no apparent reason is not a check, they aren't preventing the court from becoming too liberal they are just stopping debate. If they have an issue with a candidate then let's hear it but this is just blatant obstructionism. Holding up this many appointments hurts the country not to mention holding two other branches hostage.
So what's the reasoning for holding up the appointment of the Mexican Ambassador and the Secretary of the Army, were the candidates too liberal.
Holding up appointments for no apparent reason is not a check, they aren't preventing the court from becoming too liberal they are just stopping debate. If they have an issue with a candidate then let's hear it but this is just blatant obstructionism. Holding up this many appointments hurts the country not to mention holding two other branches hostage.
So what's the reasoning for holding up the appointment of the Mexican Ambassador and the Secretary of the Army, were the candidates too liberal.
They don't need to give you a reason as they have the constitutional rights to do so. They aren't doing anything wrong - blocking the process is part of doing their job. Sort of like filibuster. :-)
This is a brilliant way of making the Republicans that control the Senate expose themselves for the ideological fools and racist bigots they have been for the last 20 years. This bastards place their personal fortunes and futures over the good of the country. Just what I expect from these monomaniacs.
This is a brilliant way of making the Republicans that control the Senate expose themselves for the ideological fools and racist bigots they have been for the last 20 years. This bastards place their personal fortunes and futures over the good of the country. Just what I expect from these monomaniacs.
Wow, wow, wow! That's a lot of hatred against someone who are just doing their jobs.
Is this how liberals treat people? Is this the way your parents taught you to treat people?
By the way, plenty of people disagree with your "good of the country."
They don't need to give you a reason as they have the constitutional rights to do so. They aren't doing anything wrong - blocking the process is part of doing their job. Sort of like filibuster. :-)
They are usually done for an particular purpose, let's not pretend this is a filibuster.
A Dysfunctional goverment is a good thing and only 14 months to go!
Quote:
WASHINGTON -- The risk created by last month's death of Justice Antonin Scalia became a reality Tuesday when the Supreme Court deadlocked in a bankruptcy case that had been pending since the first day of the term last October.
Chief Justice John Roberts read the one-sentence verdict, which could be repeated many times before a replacement for Scalia overcomes a similar deadlock between President Obama and Senate Republicans: "The judgment is affirmed by an equally divided court."
I only want the Republicans to hold a hearing and accept or reject this nominee as they see fit so long as they provide explanations for their decisions.
Yeah! There is plenty of pent up anger left over from realizing we were fighting on the wrong side in Vietnam. Some call it PTSD but it really is just PO'ed. The Republican stupidity to try to reform Iraq into a copy of the corrupt Bush government has not made me any more pleased with the Republicans. Their blocking any further social reform has only made me more disgusted with these moneyed snobs. There is plenty of anger to go around but right now it is focused on the fools in Congress on the Republican side of the isle.
Oh well. The only one missing out is some yet unnamed tax parasite who is not getting our money yet. For the rest of us, it's hi ho hi ho its of to our jobs we go
This should tell us something......without someone pointing this stuff out would our lives be impacted in any way, shape or form? No.
We could get rid of so many bureaucrats and never miss a beat. In reality, our lives would likely improve. Fewer people doing stupid things in attempts to justify their existence would be a good thing.
Maybe with more competition for what is left, we might get better output there also.
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.