Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Republicans Nuke Democrats (in the Senate)

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Republicans Nuke Democrats (in the Senate)

    "Elections have consequences"

    http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/senat...ry?id=46608672
    {}

    "Any story sounds true until someone tells the other side and sets the record straight." -Proverbs 18:17

  • #2
    And the Senate becomes another House... I guess that was inevitable.

    Comment


    • #3
      Now that the dems have forced the nuking of the filibuster on a candidate they have no real, substantive objections to, what are they going to do if/when trump nominates someone who is truly objectionable from their perspective?

      Or, is the message that everyone who is not a leftist "objectionable"?
      Avatar is General Gerard, courtesy of Zouave.

      Churchill to Chamberlain: you had a choice between war and dishonor. You chose dishonor, and you will have war.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by BorderRuffian View Post
        Forking the rules is dumb - regardless who is doing it.

        There is no system in USA that any changes to voting 'strength' (so to speak) will not come into effect until after the next elections?
        It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion, it is by the beans of Java that thoughts acquire speed. The hands acquire shaking, the shaking becomes a warning. It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Cambronnne View Post
          Now that the dems have forced the nuking of the filibuster on a candidate they have no real, substantive objections to, what are they going to do if/when trump nominates someone who is truly objectionable from their perspective?

          Or, is the message that everyone who is not a leftist "objectionable"?
          They're setting the stage for when they have the Senate and the Presidency.
          “The time has come,” the Walrus said,
          “To talk of many things:
          Of shoes—and ships—and sealing-wax—
          Of cabbages—and kings—
          And why the sea is boiling hot—
          And whether pigs have wings.”
          ― Lewis Carroll

          Comment


          • #6
            In the past,Clarence Thomas was appointed to the Scotus with 52/48 votes,Gorsuch has already 59 votes,but that is not enough for Schumer .

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Vaeltaja View Post
              Forking the rules is dumb - regardless who is doing it.

              There is no system in USA that any changes to voting 'strength' (so to speak) will not come into effect until after the next elections?
              The filibuster is a senate rule that can be changed at will. It is not in the constitution.

              Both sides have been reluctant to do away with the filibuster knowing that while today they may be in the majority, in years to come the tables may turn.

              I think it is ironic that Senator Schumer says Judge Gorsuch is out side the mainstream. The same could be said about Judges Sotomayer, Kagan and Ginsburg.
              "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" Beatrice Evelyn Hall
              Updated for the 21st century... except if you are criticizing islam, that scares the $hii+e out of me!

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Combat Engineer View Post
                They're setting the stage for when they have the Senate and the Presidency.

                The dems don't need to set the stage. They already went there in 2013. I think they assumed they would always hold the majority. Trump is probably going to get an opportunity to nominate candidates for at least one of the liberal justices and maybe 2 of them in the near future, that could impact the court for the next 25 years.
                Avatar is General Gerard, courtesy of Zouave.

                Churchill to Chamberlain: you had a choice between war and dishonor. You chose dishonor, and you will have war.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Cambronnne View Post
                  The dems don't need to set the stage. They already went there in 2013. I think they assumed they would always hold the majority. Trump is probably going to get an opportunity to nominate candidates for at least one of the liberal justices and maybe 2 of them in the near future, that could impact the court for the next 25 years.
                  That requires knowledge of the future.

                  If the Dems wanted to preserve the Filibuster for SC Justices they would not have forced the issue. They forced it so I have to assume they wanted it gone and they wanted the GOP to be the ones to do the nuking.
                  “The time has come,” the Walrus said,
                  “To talk of many things:
                  Of shoes—and ships—and sealing-wax—
                  Of cabbages—and kings—
                  And why the sea is boiling hot—
                  And whether pigs have wings.”
                  ― Lewis Carroll

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Brilliant move by the Dem's...
                    After Donald Trump wrapped up his first speech to Congress and worked his way through the crowd, he lingered on his handshake with Anthony Kennedy, the 80-year-old Supreme Court justice.

                    The boom mics picked up their seemingly private conversation.

                    “Say hello to your boy,” Trump said, “Special guy.” “Your kids have been very nice to him,” Kennedy replied. “Well,” Trump said, “they love him, and they love him in New York.”

                    While the White House is focused this week on shepherding Trump’s first Supreme Court nominee, Neil Gorsuch, through the Senate confirmation process, the president and his team are obsessed with the next possible vacancy.

                    The likeliest candidate is Kennedy, who has sat at the decisive fulcrum of the most important Supreme Court cases for more than a decade. Replacing him with a reliable conservative would tip the court to the right, even if no other seat comes open under Trump — whose team has taken to exploring every imaginable line of communication to keep tabs on the justice and to make him comfortable as he ponders a potential retirement.

                    One back channel is the fact that Kennedy’s son, Justin, knows Donald Trump Jr. through New York real estate circles. Another is through Kennedy’s other son, Gregory, and Trump’s Silicon Valley adviser Peter Thiel. They went to Stanford Law School together and served as president of the Federalist Society in back-to-back years, according to school records. More recently, Kennedy’s firm, Disruptive Technology Advisers, has worked with Thiel’s company Palantir Technologies.

                    The White House has also closely monitored retirement chatter by tapping into the network of former Kennedy clerks, a group that includes Gorsuch himself. Some in the legal world viewed Gorsuch’s selection — he would be the first Supreme Court clerk to serve alongside a former boss — as an olive branch to Kennedy that, should he retire next, his seat would be in reliable presidential hands.

                    Those close to Trump’s judicial-selection process stress that they’re not pressuring Kennedy to hang up his robe, only seeking to put him at ease.

                    [...]

                    Although Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell invoked the “nuclear option” Thursday to eliminate the filibuster in order to confirm Gorsuch to the Supreme Court, Trump advisers are still wary of the coming fight over Kennedy’s seat. Gorsuch is replacing the late Justice Antonin Scalia, a mainstay of the conservative bloc. Kennedy’s retirement would dramatically shift the political center of gravity on the court.

                    [...]

                    Republican and Democratic lawmakers alike are readying for the biggest fight if and when Kennedy retires.

                    Trump officials say the president does not feel constrained to pick a second Supreme Court justice from his campaign list, despite a September press release in which Trump said, “This list is definitive and I will choose only from it in picking future Justices of the United States Supreme Court.”

                    One new name percolating at the highest levels of the Trump administration is Brett Kavanaugh, a 52-year-old who has already served a decade on the D.C. Court of Appeals.

                    That may not be an accident. He, too, is a former clerk of Justice Kennedy.

                    http://www.politico.com/story/2017/0...e-court-236925

                    Trump and his family clearly have ties to Justice Kennedy and his family and it appears that they are trying to "put him at ease" about hanging up his robe.

                    If Kennedy retires, Trump will be free to nominate almost anyone... Even a Robert Bork-type judge.

                    Had the Democrats kept their "powder dry," they might have been able to maintain a filibuster if Trump nominates a Bork-type judge to replace Kennedy. RINO's like Collins (R-ME), McCain (R-AZ), Graham (R-SC), etc. might not have been willing to support the nuclear option in such a case.

                    Watts Up With That? | The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Ahem, the dems changed the rules in 2013. So its nothing enshrined. Get over it, its how the dems played and now its the other teams ball...
                      Credo quia absurdum.


                      Quantum mechanics describes nature as absurd from the point of view of common sense. And yet it fully agrees with experiment. So I hope you can accept nature as She is - absurd! - Richard Feynman

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        (sigh)...let's just get on with it...

                        Gorsuch's nomination was a sure thing. I think that Schumer and the Democratic minority blew their wad on filibuster in order to just flip the bird to McConnell and the rest for not allowing Obama's nominee even the courtesy of a look. Expensive flip...
                        ARRRR! International Talk Like A Pirate Day - September 19th
                        IN MARE IN COELO

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          No we need to get rid of the filibuster on legislation and we'll be able to once again operate a Congress...
                          “The time has come,” the Walrus said,
                          “To talk of many things:
                          Of shoes—and ships—and sealing-wax—
                          Of cabbages—and kings—
                          And why the sea is boiling hot—
                          And whether pigs have wings.”
                          ― Lewis Carroll

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Jose50 View Post
                            Gorsuch's nomination was a sure thing. I think that Schumer and the Democratic minority blew their wad on filibuster in order to just flip the bird to McConnell and the rest for not allowing Obama's nominee even the courtesy of a look. Expensive flip...
                            Its good news. As is the fact that the DNC is not learning from their mistakes.

                            This was a huge mistake by the Dems.
                            Any man can hold his place when the bands play and women throw flowers; it is when the enemy presses close and metal shears through the ranks that one can acertain which are soldiers, and which are not.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by 17thfabn View Post
                              The filibuster is a senate rule that can be changed at will. It is not in the constitution.

                              Both sides have been reluctant to do away with the filibuster knowing that while today they may be in the majority, in years to come the tables may turn.

                              I think it is ironic that Senator Schumer says Judge Gorsuch is out side the mainstream. The same could be said about Judges Sotomayer, Kagan and Ginsburg.
                              More importantly, the filibuster was the last thing that differentiated the Senate from the House. Now the Senate simply becomes a second House, directly elected, and working on a majority.
                              That means from now on basically everything is going to pass on a majority vote. If the Republicans ever wanted to undo everything the Left has done, now's the time. The Democrats have handed it to them on a silver platter.

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X