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.
When McConnell refused to even have a vote on Obamas supreme court pick, the "norms" of how the supreme court was filled were overturned. The fact that the Democrats are talking about following the letter of the law instead of the spirit of it all should come as no surprise.
When your side starts acting in a manner that is not consistent with what anyone considers fair, you should not be surprised when the opposing side returns the favor.
Not true. Trump is doing, or trying to do exactly what he promised to do during his campaign. What other politician has done that? The fact that he is following through on his campaign promises makes his supporters happy.
To quote Ronald Regan:
"To conservatives, ever day is the 4th of July, To liberals, ever day is April 15th!"
That did not seem to matter to the GOP with Merrick Garland
which of course the goes back over time as each party screws over the other.
The circumstance for Garland was different, and I say that having nothing to do with Trump.
Also for any Democrats thinking this is partisan and your party is getting the shaft, never forget much of what is happening now is a result of your parties actions.
1) The Garland precedent was started by the Democrats, with Biden the most vocal on the issue when Bush was POTUS.
2) The inability to filibuster via the "nuclear option" was a Democrat party line vote with Harry Reid being the most vocal.
[NOTE- Before you buy into liberal talking points about how it was for all judges, just not scotus ones, that misses the point. The (D's) were warned and practically begged not to go the nuclear route when they were in power, because this would be the inevitable result. They chose to ignore the warnings, and are now reaping what they sowed.
I'd also point out that when the (R's) were in control before that, they considered the nuclear option, but decided against it. That was in part due to the (D's) begging for them not to do it, and predicting the very thing, they then ignored when they gained control]
Here are just a few video clips, and the one most telling is ironically is Biden with his football field analogy;
Then of course the Democrats did exactly the opposite when they were in power just a few short years later.
Lastly, I would be remiss if I did not mention how the Democrats have used despicable tactics to smear judges with great reputations that were highly qualified(which is the only requirement). Yet because of ideology alone they demagogue and destroy a persons character in an effort to block them.
It happened to Judge Robert Bork, then they tried it with Judge Thomas as well.
Not because they were not qualified mind you, as Bork may have been one of the most qualfied even to be nominated.
Instead they feared Bork's intellectual acumen, and were afraid he would influence others on the court to use the strict originalism judicial philosophy. That is what they are all suppose to do anyway, regardless of how they view the law.
You are cruel, if irrefutable information qualifies as cruelty.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vector1
The circumstance for Garland was different, and I say that having nothing to do with Trump.
Also for any Democrats thinking this is partisan and your party is getting the shaft, never forget much of what is happening now is a result of your parties actions.
1) The Garland precedent was started by the Democrats, with Biden the most vocal on the issue when Bush was POTUS.
2) The inability to filibuster via the "nuclear option" was a Democrat party line vote with Harry Reid being the most vocal.
[NOTE- Before you buy into liberal talking points about how it was for all judges, just not scotus ones, that misses the point. The (D's) were warned and practically begged not to go the nuclear route when they were in power, because this would be the inevitable result. They chose to ignore the warnings, and are now reaping what they sowed.
I'd also point out that when the (R's) were in control before that, they considered the nuclear option, but decided against it. That was in part due to the (D's) begging for them not to do it, and predicting the very thing, they then ignored when they gained control]
Here are just a few video clips, and the one most telling is ironically is Biden with his football field analogy;
Then of course the Democrats did exactly the opposite when they were in power just a few short years later.
Lastly, I would be remiss if I did not mention how the Democrats have used despicable tactics to smear judges with great reputations that were highly qualified(which is the only requirement). Yet because of ideology alone they demagogue and destroy a persons character in an effort to block them.
It happened to Judge Robert Bork, then they tried it with Judge Thomas as well.
Not because they were not qualified mind you, as Bork may have been one of the most qualfied even to be nominated.
Instead they feared Bork's intellectual acumen, and were afraid he would influence others on the court to use the strict originalism judicial philosophy. That is what they are all suppose to do anyway, regardless of how they view the law.
He is already preparing to nominate a 2nd Justice when Kennedy retires.
Now we look to Breyer and Ginsburg and their advanced age. If they pass away (god forbid), or steps down due to infirmity...can they last 2 to 6 more years? Could Trump actually appoint 4 (!) Justices? Of course, that depends on the republicans keeping the house and senate.
What do you guys have to say? Should there be a limit to how many Justices a POTUS can appoint?
We have got to get Ginsberg out of there..her opinions are so toxic to America..
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.
