60
   

Turning The Ballot Box Against Republicans

 
 
oralloy
 
  0  
Reply Sun 20 Sep, 2020 07:54 am
@hingehead,
hingehead wrote:
Colour me surprised that Trump wants to nominate RBG's replacement less than two months out from the election after the repugnicunts blocked Merrick Garland because 9 months of a presidential term was too soon for Obama to nominate a replacement.
Hypocrytical a55holes.

What hypocrisy?? I see no hypocrisy here.

Merrick Garland was blocked as revenge for all the W nominees that the Democrats blocked in 2007-08.

Unless the Democrats take total control of all branches of government this November, there is no reason to not confirm Mr. Trump's pick before the end of the year.
MontereyJack
 
  1  
Reply Sun 20 Sep, 2020 08:58 am
@oralloy,
And repubs blocked Bill Clinton nominees before that. The fact remains that McConnell invented a bogus reason to block Garland and now dismisses the very point he trumpeted so loudly four years ago, when it is to his political advantage (and the country's detriment) to do so. Republicans--Chicanery R Us.
oralloy
 
  0  
Reply Sun 20 Sep, 2020 09:07 am
@MontereyJack,
The Republicans never imposed a blanket blockade of all of Bill Clinton's nominees like the Democrats did to W in 2007-08.
oralloy
 
  0  
Reply Sun 20 Sep, 2020 09:09 am
@MontereyJack,
MontereyJack wrote:
trump pulled out of the peaceful nuclear agreement with Iran, much to the appalled consternation from our ally negotiating partners in the agreement. Seems he's the one who's ******* over peace with iran. ramirez as usual has it wrong.

Mr. Obama is a bully.

Like moist bullies, Mr. Obama eventually picked a fight with someone who was willing to stand up to him.

If he didn't want to have his legacy annihilated, Mr. Obama shouldn't have been going around picking fights with people.

MontereyJack
 
  2  
Reply Sun 20 Sep, 2020 09:16 am
@oralloy,
that is false history.
MontereyJack
 
  2  
Reply Sun 20 Sep, 2020 09:21 am
@oralloy,
Oh, you mean after trump spent years trying to bully obama totally falsely with the whole birther conspiracy. trump is a petty, vindictive bully who deomonizes 2/3 of the country. Vote him out, then convict him.
oralloy
 
  -1  
Reply Sun 20 Sep, 2020 09:48 am
@MontereyJack,
This abuse of the law to prosecute people who disagree with them is why we need to outlaw the Democratic Party in America.
oralloy
 
  0  
Reply Sun 20 Sep, 2020 09:49 am
@MontereyJack,
MontereyJack wrote:
that is false history.

The Republicans did not impose a blanket ban on all of Bill Clinton's nominees, and you cannot provide any evidence that they did so.
MontereyJack
 
  1  
Reply Sun 20 Sep, 2020 11:36 am
@oralloy,
stupid opinion which will never happen, unless trump succeeds in his dreams of dictatorship, which is why the country intends to vote him out in nov.
MontereyJack
 
  1  
Reply Sun 20 Sep, 2020 11:39 am
@oralloy,
some evidence there was a blanket ban by dems, please. remains so far purely your fantasy. Of course there WAS a blanket ban by repubs on passing anything obama proposed for eight years, as they decided his first day in office.
oralloy
 
  -1  
Reply Sun 20 Sep, 2020 12:36 pm
@MontereyJack,
MontereyJack wrote:
will never happen

All the government needs to do is pass a law outlawing the Democratic Party and seizing all their political funds.

Maybe the courts will strike it down, but it's worth a try. Maybe it will stand.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -1  
Reply Sun 20 Sep, 2020 12:37 pm
@MontereyJack,
MontereyJack wrote:
some evidence there was a blanket ban by dems, please.

https://www.politico.com/blogs/politico-now/2008/02/bush-ups-the-ante-in-nomination-fight-005990

"President Bush plans to meet at the White House on Thursday with some of his nominees still awaiting confirmation by the Senate, reigniting a fight over their appointments with Senate Democrats.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) took to the floor on Wednesday, to denounce the meeting as 'just another of this administration's political stunts, misplaced blame and failure to take responsibility for its own actions.'

Since Democrats took control of Congress a year ago, the battle of wills over nominations has left many high-level vacancies unfilled throughout the federal government. For example, the Federal Election Commission is unable to act officially because it does not have the required quorum."



MontereyJack wrote:
remains so far purely your fantasy.

Progressives dislike reality, but no. Reality isn't a fantasy.


MontereyJack wrote:
Of course there WAS a blanket ban by repubs on passing anything obama proposed for eight years, as they decided his first day in office.

That is incorrect. John Boehner reached a budget deal with Mr. Obama in 2011. Then Mr. Obama gave in to leftist extremists and withdrew from the deal.

The main reason why Mr. Obama didn't get any legislation passed in his second term is because he squandered the entire first hundred days of his second term trying to ban pistol grips on semi-auto long guns.

Moderate Republican Senators tried to negotiate immigration reform with Mr. Obama in 2015, but the Democrats undermined the negotiations because they want immigrants to stay at risk so they can pretend to care about them during elections. Democrats have a long and sordid history of ensuring that vulnerable people stay at risk so they can pretend to care about them on election day.
TheCobbler
 
  2  
Reply Sun 20 Sep, 2020 01:35 pm
@snood,
Hypocrisy is when a person says one thing and does the opposite... This is more like the republicans doing despicable things and blaming others for it.

Joe Biden is a racist! (cynical)
izzythepush
 
  3  
Reply Sun 20 Sep, 2020 01:41 pm
@TheCobbler,
The hypocrisy is to do with what they’re saying about Ginsberg’s replacement compared to what they said about Scalia’s replacement
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Sun 20 Sep, 2020 02:09 pm
https://cdn.creators.com/210/285491/285491_image.jpg
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
https://cdn.creators.com/210/285922/285922_image.jpg
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
https://cdn.creators.com/210/285987/285987_image.jpg
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
https://cdn.creators.com/210/286333/286333_image.jpg
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
https://cdn.creators.com/210/286409/286409_image.jpg
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
https://cdn.creators.com/210/286829/286829_image.jpg
0 Replies
 
coldjoint
 
  -2  
Reply Sun 20 Sep, 2020 02:21 pm
@izzythepush,
izzythepush wrote:

The hypocrisy is to do with what they’re saying about Ginsberg’s replacement compared to what they said about Scalia’s replacement

Quote:
FLASHBACK: Liberals Celebrated the Death of Conservative Justice Antonin Scalia

Remember the ghouls? I do. You talking about hypocrisy is a non-starter.
Quote:

Charles Finch
@CharlesFinch
I mean, if you don't want your death politicized, don't lead a repugnant and profoundly influential political life.

Quote:
Moshe Kasher
@moshekasher
Just to make sure I understand your argument: you want me to show respect for the death of a hateful man who disrespected so many lives?

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/matt-margolis/2020/09/19/flashback-liberals-celebrated-the-death-of-conservative-justice-antonin-scalia-n944817
0 Replies
 
NSFW (view)
MontereyJack
 
  3  
Reply Sun 20 Sep, 2020 03:29 pm
@oralloy,
read your own cite. that says nothoing about a blanket ban. bush made some bad nominations. trump has made nothing but bad nominations and the lickspittle senate republicans approve them, no matter how unqualified they are. Something like 158 highly partisan trump judges now.
coldjoint
 
  -1  
Reply Sun 20 Sep, 2020 04:17 pm
@MontereyJack,
MontereyJack wrote:

read your own cite. that says nothoing about a blanket ban. bush made some bad nominations. trump has made nothing but bad nominations and the lickspittle senate republicans approve them, no matter how unqualified they are. Something like 158 highly partisan trump judges now.

Ginsberg praised both of Trump's nominees. Being informed is a wonderful thing, give it a try.
Quote:
Ginsburg Praises Trump SCOTUS Picks Kavanaugh, Gorsuch - 'Very Decent, Very Smart Individuals'

https://www.westernjournal.com/ginsburg-praises-trump-scotus-picks-kavanaugh-gorsuch-decent-smart-individuals/
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Sun 20 Sep, 2020 07:57 pm
@MontereyJack,
MontereyJack wrote:
read your own cite. that says nothoing about a blanket ban.

Sure it does:

"Since Democrats took control of Congress a year ago, the battle of wills over nominations has left many high-level vacancies unfilled throughout the federal government. For example, the Federal Election Commission is unable to act officially because it does not have the required quorum."


MontereyJack wrote:
bush made some bad nominations.

His nominations were fine. The Democrats just disagreed with them.

Well the Republicans "just disagreed with" Merrick Garland.

What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2020 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.08 seconds on 10/23/2020 at 06:23:23