You should petition the Chuckster to change the rules for confirming a Supreme Court Justice. I'm sure he would get right on it.
McConnell Warns Against ‘Radical’ Supreme Court Pick
- Thread starter cigaretteman
- Start date
Why would I do that, and what about the post you're responding to brought you to this line of thinking?
Because you're bitching about the Turtle taking advantage of Senate Parliamentary rules regarding Supreme Court Justice confirmation processes in order to benefit his political caucus. I'll ask again, what is wrong with that? Cry all you want about what he did, it was within the rules the Senate put forth. The Senate makes the rules. If the Senate doesn't like it the Senate can change it. Hence petition the Chuckster so the Turtle can never do that again.
McConnell had specifcally named Garland earlier as a potential Obama SC nominee he could support. Moscow Mitch is a hypocritical ass of the highest order.
So the Dems "taking advantage" of the rules to add more seats to the SC would be ok by you. Good to know.
No, stacking the court would not be okay with me. There is nothing illegal about doing it though. If they think stacking the court is politically prudent they should try it. You people act like the Turtle broke the law...he did not.
He didn’t break the law. However, it was not a move made in best interest of the country.
Democrats would agree with your statement. Republicans would not. Hence the argument.
So "OK" with you is conditional? Or you weren't ok with McConnell breaking over 200 years of Senate practice to ignore Garland?
I was very "okay" with the Turtle doing what he did. I do not want the SC packed but by virtue of it not being illegal I would be "okay" with it if done by the Democrats. I wouldn't like it. I wouldn't be crying 5 years after it happened. Let's stop pretending that when someone on our respective sides does something to benefit our side we shouldn't be happy about it.
Things that do long-term damage to the country are not ok with me no matter who does it. Guess that's the difference.
LMAO...long term damage for not confirming Garland??? One could make the argument that confirming Garland would have been long term damage for the country. Stop being so dramatic.
You realize that response makes you look breathtakingly stupid...right?
Okay, please explain how the Turtle refusing to conform Garland did "long term" damage to the country.
He and other right wingers don't care about that or what is best for our country. They only care about themselves and their party. McConnell has said as much and demonstrated it many times. It's deplorable.
Because the purpose is to benefit his caucus NOT to benefit the country which is his sworn oath. He and the republicans made it clear with Obama that they had no interest in working to make America better but rather to get Obama out of office as fast as possible. The bullshit we see now is directly related to that sort of selfish interest.
You're someone else who is more concerned about "your side" than what's good for the whole country. It is despicable and consistent with the republican party.
Look at the division it has bred. The partisanship that puts party over country. That effort is one of many McConnell has specifically led to drive us to the major issues of today.
Everything was just hunky dory before ole Mitch refused to nominate Garland. Bipartisanship never, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever existed in Washington before then. Impeaching Trump over a phone call to Ukraine was in the best interest of the country too I suppose. Calling in a fake witness to testify against Kavanaugh wasn't divisive at all, no, no, no, no, no. Making Thomas's confirmation about a pube on a Coke can was just par for the course...spare me your "can't we all just get along" while you sit upon a pedestal of righteous indignation BS whenever your side loses.
It started it's current upswing with the Tea Party and the numerous made up conspiracy theories about Obama. It continued with McConnell declaring the #1 goal of republicans was to make Obama a one term President. Not to work to make America better, but to get Obama out of office. The republicans selfish positions have created the massive divisions we are seeing today.
Here's some of your problems:
Mitch refused to at least have hearings Garland. (Obama nominated him)
Impeaching trump over a phone call.
Calling a fake witness to testify against Kavanaugh.
Making Thomas's confirmation about a pube on a Coke can.
Like all 4 of those were just that simple. Statements like you made in this thread is why you have no credibility.
I wasn't bitching, what's done is done. I was illuminating how, quite often, dishonestly and exaggeration is used to justify unprecedented rules changes. They have the power to do so, but that doesn't change that it was a naked power grab.
Look at what you just wrote and tell me how I'm not suppose to make fun of that. But in the spirit of bipartisanship I won't. So all the angst in the country can be blamed on your political opponent? Isn't the goal of every politician to make their political opponent a 1 term public official. Just stop with this pollyannish view on politics.
That's what Mitch said, make Obama a one term president. He never mentioned anything during that statement that I recall of making America a better place, which might have been a better thing to say. He made an ass of himself at the time, but it fits him well.
McConnell played the horribly flawed game better than the Democrats did. But he played it within the rules the Democrats helped to construct, so deal with it. Either get better at the game or work to change the rules.
Personally, I thought it was a lame move on McConnell’s part, but it worked.
Personally, I thought it was a lame move on McConnell’s part, but it worked.
You don't because you can't. The republicans are not my political opponent - before Trump I had voted for more republican Presidential candidates than Democrats. I'm an Independent who leaned conservative on many issues. The Tea Party, McConnell and Trump taking the constituency so far to the right is the reason they are no longer in consideration. Until all of that is renounced completely and left behind in their rhetoric and behaviors their candidates will not be considered by me. It's deplorable and I won't support it.
The sworn goal of our elected officials is to do what's right for the country, not their party. That you and other right wing Trump lovers continue to advocate for this type of partisanship is why things are so shitty right now.
Naked power grab? Last time I checked the Turtle isn't Senate majority leader...
I didn't say he was. It might help to only read what I'm typing instead of assuming whatever it is you're assuming.
I agree. The divide between sides keeps getting wider and wider. Nothing the left is saying now is enticing me to get along with them. And I understand that it is the same on the right. So what gives?
What?!?!?!? You accused the Turtle of a naked power grab. I mean...what else am I suppose to insinuate? BTW the Turtle didn't change any rules. That would take a Senate vote. He liberally interpreted them, something some of the Justices on the Supreme Court can appreciate.
Independents agree with me.
Republicans we’re wrong. McConnell did not do this for the good of the country.
Majority of independents. People who actually care about what’s best for the country.
Far right wing nut jobs agreed with McConnell. Those who don’t care about what’s best for the country agreed with McConnell.
He was at the time of the power grab mentioned. Stop being purposefully obtuse.
Seriously, how was it a power grab? It was a successful attempt to keep a radical left supreme court nomination from being confirmed. I'll give you that. But a power grab? Come on...that's weak.
It's amazing how blatantly incorrect your account of a clearly documented event has led you to projecting an opinion on to someone and then arguing against it.
