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.
Nice response that misses the point entirely. Congratulations.
No, I think YOU miss the point. Especially considering the next talking point from the Dems has been that they should just wait and expand the # of justices on the supreme court. My entire point with this is that its ridiculous for either party to think they are in the right, they try to change the rules and play games with the existing rules on both sides but then when it comes back to bite them they scream, cry and point fingers. Its exactly what you see going on now, and my only hope is that it blows up in either party's face enough to make them rethink it going forward. Hopefully thats the case here and this whole stacking the court ploy will die the death it should.
No, I think YOU miss the point. Especially considering the next talking point from the Dems has been that they should just wait and expand the # of justices on the supreme court. My entire point with this is that its ridiculous for either party to think they are in the right, they try to change the rules and play games with the existing rules on both sides but then when it comes back to bite them they scream, cry and point fingers. Its exactly what you see going on now, and my only hope is that it blows up in either party's face enough to make them rethink it going forward. Hopefully thats the case here and this whole stacking the court ploy will die the death it should.
That was not your response at all. Now that we have a actual response from you let me address it.
The Republicans have truly expanded this nonsense. And I am sure when the Democrats respond in some way we will hear crying. The expanded justices would be a way to address these actions by the right-but in your dream world you think its unfair. The Republicans changed the rules, and now you are screaming in advance that the Democrats might respond? Are you that much of a hypocrite that you think the Democrats should just take it and not respond? REALLY?
Tell me how the Democrats broke the norms with Supreme court justices first. Please.
That was not your response at all. Now that we have a actual response from you let me address it.
The Republicans have truly expanded this nonsense. And I am sure when the Democrats respond in some way we will hear crying. The expanded justices would be a way to address these actions by the right-but in your dream world you think its unfair. The Republicans changed the rules, and now you are screaming in advance that the Democrats might respond? Are you that much of a hypocrite that you think the Democrats should just take it and not respond? REALLY?
Tell me how the Democrats broke the norms with Supreme court justices first. Please.
No, at some point someone has to stand up and be the adult in the room, but both sides are incapable, and saying the expanded justices would be a way to respond is just doubling down on bad decisions and the chain reaction of this whole ridiculous fiasco.
No, at some point someone has to stand up and be the adult in the room, but both sides are incapable, and saying the expanded justices would be a way to respond is just doubling down on bad decisions and the chain reaction of this whole ridiculous fiasco.
Yes, that IS sort of what happens when one side picks up a weapon and starts beating on the other. They pick up something to defend themselves. Your attempted argument is the ol "both sides are bad" nonsense. Sorry, but one side is starting this stuff over and over. And it hasn't been the Democrats. And deep down you know it. Even now the Democrats talk about the importance of bipartisanship. Meanwhile the only Republican to talk about it recently, and even in his own statements before his death is called names, and a RINO.
Yes, that IS sort of what happens when one side picks up a weapon and starts beating on the other. They pick up something to defend themselves. Your attempted argument is the ol "both sides are bad" nonsense. Sorry, but one side is starting this stuff over and over. And it hasn't been the Democrats. And deep down you know it. Even now the Democrats talk about the importance of bipartisanship. Meanwhile the only Republican to talk about it recently, and even in his own statements before his death is called names, and a RINO.
Politics are not weapons, and the fact that you try and position it that way is very telling of the actual problem, so is your desire to try and claim "on no, its ONLY the Republicans" and in terms of someone besides the recently departed, Ben Sasse comes to mind.
There has been an incredibly lack of partnership or progress from our representatives for well over a decade now and they both share the blame, sorry if that makes you feel like your Dems are being attacked, but they are most certainly part of the problem.
I would rather be denied a vote than have my character assassinated like that. Dems did it to Clarence Thomas too, but it didn't work.
Actually Anita Hill did-and at IMMENSE personal cost to herself even today. Additionally many of his other female coworkers testified privately to congress about it. To this day Anita Hill maintains she was truthful-something she has done at immense cost. It wasn't character assassination-the man simply had a bad character.
Politics are not weapons, and the fact that you try and position it that way is very telling of the actual problem, so is your desire to try and claim "on no, its ONLY the Republicans" and in terms of someone besides the recently departed, Ben Sasse comes to mind.
There has been an incredibly lack of partnership or progress from our representatives for well over a decade now and they both share the blame, sorry if that makes you feel like your Dems are being attacked, but they are most certainly part of the problem.
Part of the problem? Perhaps. But a small part of it. The Republicans have literally elected a man who calls people names. Think about it. And thats the party you are seeking to defend. Even you seem to be unwilling to say that the Democrats started playing games with Supreme court vacancies. And given that they are lifetime appointments, these are arguably more important then a presidency.
You're trying to defend a massive swamp by pointing to a strip of grass in it.
Did Democrat Senators "deserve" a hearing on Merritt Garland?
Garland deserved the hearing. The Senate didn't do it's constitutional job.
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.
