POLITICAL THREAD
- Thread starter kybobcat
- Start date
![[laughing]](http://l.yimg.com/j/assets/img/emoticons/classic/laugh.r191677.gif "Laughing [laughing]")
Was just told by a female friend that Blumenthal stuck his finger in his own ass and licked his lips in her direction.
We're losing a lot of politicians today.
He needs to step down.
Guilty.
We're losing a lot of politicians today.
He needs to step down.
Guilty.
Pick up Indiana, Missouri, and North Dakota off of this would be a nice win. Even if Kavanaugh doesn't get in, Trump can recess appoint knowing he has at least the same amount votes, but a stronger core.
How about this.
Let the democrats railroad this nominee, win the senate, and then give them something they weren't bargaining for......
Push Ted Cruz through the process and appoint him to a lifetime position on the supreme court.
Make them eat their own sht.
Let the democrats railroad this nominee, win the senate, and then give them something they weren't bargaining for......
Push Ted Cruz through the process and appoint him to a lifetime position on the supreme court.
Make them eat their own sht.
Identity politics has resulted in a boom of irrational, extreme and flat out stupid thought process. Why can’t you be for women’s rights AND respect males? Why can’t you be for actual equal rights? When did having a boy while being a feminist become such a big deal that you’d abort your child based on their gender? Seems extremely sexist to me.
Divorice your republican husbands? How dare you not automatically believe a woman no matter what! Also, I don’t agree with you on a few issues so let’s end our marriage. This is the tolerant party speaking. They go low, we go high. Biggest group of frauds I’ve seen since a UNC graduating class.
The entire foundation of the Democratic establishment is based on victimhood and isms. That’s it. They have nothing else to go on. And even with that, they still find a way to do that wrong. Actual victims are either silenced or not taken seriously by a large segment of the population because any sane person knows that there’s a difference between rubbing her arm and raping her. Actual isms can’t get the coverage they need because EVERYTHING is some type of ism now. An example of racism in 2018 is if you’re white and haven’t seen Black Panther. You’re sexist if you don’t hire that unqualified woman.
They’re doing their best to kill due process, rational thinking and common sense.
Because equality was never their goal. It was always superiority.
Actual equality was achieved years ago.
Spot on. Just makes me laugh when I read something about equality and fairness like they’re still pulling the wool over our eyes.
When the Obamacare vote happened in March 2010, I was pissed that it passed, of course. But I couldn't get too angry with some San Francisco Democrat who voted for it. It's what she wanted, it's what her constituents wants. My anger was for the handful of Democrats in red states that voted yes - and Joe Donnelly was first on that list. His state was decidedly red, he voted for it anyway. Didn't have the decency to resign soon thereafter, like another D in rural Michigan did. Not only did it not cost him his seat the next time around, he eventually graduated to the Senate.....
Just saw this blog post from 2005, I think. Some things never change:
GOP: CAN WE PLEASE DO IT LIKE GINSBURG? [Byron York]
Look for Republicans to point to the confirmations of Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer as models of the process that should be employed in the effort to replace Sandra Day O'Connor. Both Ginsburg and Breyer were nominated and confirmed at a time (1993-1994) in which the president's party -- Democrats -- also controlled the Senate. And both were given relatively easy passage through the Senate because the minority party -- Republicans -- cooperated with Democrats to ensure a quick confirmation. Ginsburg was nominated on June 14, 1993 and confirmed by the Senate on August 3, 1993. Breyer was nominated on May 13, 1994 and confirmed on July 29, 1994.
They moved with such speed because Republicans, in particular Sen. Orrin Hatch, the ranking GOP member on the Senate Judiciary Committee at the time, declined to challenge their records. Ginsburg, in particular, received something of a bye from Republicans despite her former position as general counsel of the American Civil Liberties Union; had they chosen to, Republicans could have hung every extreme ACLU position around Ginsburg's neck. Instead, "Sen. Hatch put an orderly and fair process above scoring political points," says one high-ranking staffer involved at the time. "It ensured that the Senate's conduct of the hearings was constructive rather than divisive."
Republicans also chose not to oppose Ginsburg even though she refused to answer dozens of questions during her confirmation hearings. Among others, she declined to give her views on Roe v. Wade, on the Second Amendment, on the death penalty, on the Voting Rights Act, on race-based congressional redistricting, and on adoption rights for gay couples, among many other issues. At one point in her hearings, Republican Sen. Strom Thurmond told her, "In preparing these questions or any others I may propound during the hearings, if you feel they are inappropriate to answer, will you speak out and say so." On another occasion, Thurmond said, "I will not press you to answer any that you feel are inappropriate."
Not surprisingly, Democrats wholeheartedly agreed. Then-chairman Sen. Joseph Biden told Ginsburg, "You not only have a right to choose what you will answer and not answer, but in my view you should not answer a question of what your view will be on an issue that clearly is going to come before the court in 50 forms probably, over your tenure on the court."
Of course, Republicans today realize that Democrats, now the minority party, will never extend to a Bush nominee the sort of treatment the GOP gave Ginsburg in 1993. Nevertheless, they will tell the story over and over, in hopes that someone will listen.
GOP: CAN WE PLEASE DO IT LIKE GINSBURG? [Byron York]
Look for Republicans to point to the confirmations of Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer as models of the process that should be employed in the effort to replace Sandra Day O'Connor. Both Ginsburg and Breyer were nominated and confirmed at a time (1993-1994) in which the president's party -- Democrats -- also controlled the Senate. And both were given relatively easy passage through the Senate because the minority party -- Republicans -- cooperated with Democrats to ensure a quick confirmation. Ginsburg was nominated on June 14, 1993 and confirmed by the Senate on August 3, 1993. Breyer was nominated on May 13, 1994 and confirmed on July 29, 1994.
They moved with such speed because Republicans, in particular Sen. Orrin Hatch, the ranking GOP member on the Senate Judiciary Committee at the time, declined to challenge their records. Ginsburg, in particular, received something of a bye from Republicans despite her former position as general counsel of the American Civil Liberties Union; had they chosen to, Republicans could have hung every extreme ACLU position around Ginsburg's neck. Instead, "Sen. Hatch put an orderly and fair process above scoring political points," says one high-ranking staffer involved at the time. "It ensured that the Senate's conduct of the hearings was constructive rather than divisive."
Republicans also chose not to oppose Ginsburg even though she refused to answer dozens of questions during her confirmation hearings. Among others, she declined to give her views on Roe v. Wade, on the Second Amendment, on the death penalty, on the Voting Rights Act, on race-based congressional redistricting, and on adoption rights for gay couples, among many other issues. At one point in her hearings, Republican Sen. Strom Thurmond told her, "In preparing these questions or any others I may propound during the hearings, if you feel they are inappropriate to answer, will you speak out and say so." On another occasion, Thurmond said, "I will not press you to answer any that you feel are inappropriate."
Not surprisingly, Democrats wholeheartedly agreed. Then-chairman Sen. Joseph Biden told Ginsburg, "You not only have a right to choose what you will answer and not answer, but in my view you should not answer a question of what your view will be on an issue that clearly is going to come before the court in 50 forms probably, over your tenure on the court."
Of course, Republicans today realize that Democrats, now the minority party, will never extend to a Bush nominee the sort of treatment the GOP gave Ginsburg in 1993. Nevertheless, they will tell the story over and over, in hopes that someone will listen.
Turns out there are 4 - not just 2 -- certainties in life:
1. Death
2. Taxes
3. The Republican nominee for President will be called "Hitler"
4. Any Supreme Court candidate put forth by a Republican will be demagogued.
Every time.
1. Death
2. Taxes
3. The Republican nominee for President will be called "Hitler"
4. Any Supreme Court candidate put forth by a Republican will be demagogued.
Every time.
Maybe its been asked but I missed it, but where the heck has @moe_schmoe been at? Don't think I've seen a post of his in a while
Flake is such a weasel - wants to delay the floor vote for additional fbi investigation for one week
Really is a travesty a Senator can get away with negotiating his vote on something as important as a SCOTUS seat for personal profit.
Flake is making millions of dollars as we speak.
Flake is making millions of dollars as we speak.
Flake is an a-hole. However, he is going to vote Kavanaugh out of committee.
I'm hoping Flake is just trying to give himself some cover when his Dem buddies come for him, but will vote to confirm.
Just enough time for between 2 and 56 women to come forward.
Lol yeah I'm sure that FBI investigation would only last one week. No way its dragged past the midterms (sarcasm off)
I'd tell them that Feinstein took your week delay already.
Grassley called Flake's bulls**t. Made him vote w/o preconditions--basically told him vote no now if youve got the balls.. Feinstein not even sure what she voted on! Leahy now after the vote trying to add preconditions to the floor vote that Flake discussed, but Grassley never agreed and took a roll call vote w/ no preconditions and it was 11-10.
Hopefully Mitch will channel Sonny Corleone:
"No, not this time Flake, no more discussions, no more meetings, no more Democrat tricks, you give 'em one message, I want Kavanaugh, if not, it's all out war, we go to the mattresses!"
"No, not this time Flake, no more discussions, no more meetings, no more Democrat tricks, you give 'em one message, I want Kavanaugh, if not, it's all out war, we go to the mattresses!"
So I am sure about 5 other women will now come forward. Dems just got some additional time unless Mitch says F it and puts the vote on the floor on Monday.
Similar threads
