Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is all Obama's fault for being so arrogant and high handed while in office. This is not political, it's personal . McConnell is giving Obama a kick in the ass on his way out the door and there's not a damn thing he can do about it. This is a great big FU to Obama who has certainly earned it. "I have a pen" he says if Congress doesn't do what he wants. Well McConnell shoved that pen right up Obama's ass. It showing the whole world that the master bullshiter Obama has no political skill at all when it comes right down to it.

Merrick Garland is a feckless ticket puncher who had to know Obama was just using him as a stalking horse, yet his ego wouldn't let him refuse a doomed from the start nomination.

For all if you whiny cry babies who say the Senate MUST hold hearings....there is no requirement that they do so on Obama's timetable. Face reality McConnell won, the left Lost.

Obama Derangement at it's finest.

The Obama was arrogant argument is such a false narrative.

And good luck, dipshit, when you have Hillary in office.

I'm a moderate Republican voter, and your comment is why Hillary may not win the election. That's not the way to get your typical Trump-voting males to vote for HRC.

Hillary doesn't need the typical Trump voters. And McConnell may end up with a big cow pie on his face.

Anonymous wrote:This is all Obama's fault for being so arrogant and high handed while in office. This is not political, it's personal . McConnell is giving Obama a kick in the ass on his way out the door and there's not a damn thing he can do about it. This is a great big FU to Obama who has certainly earned it. "I have a pen" he says if Congress doesn't do what he wants. Well McConnell shoved that pen right up Obama's ass. It showing the whole world that the master bullshiter Obama has no political skill at all when it comes right down to it.

Merrick Garland is a feckless ticket puncher who had to know Obama was just using him as a stalking horse, yet his ego wouldn't let him refuse a doomed from the start nomination.

For all if you whiny cry babies who say the Senate MUST hold hearings....there is no requirement that they do so on Obama's timetable. Face reality McConnell won, the left Lost.

"Arrogant and high handed" is a euphemism for uppity Negro. In reality, arrogance and high-handedness is a refusal to do the constitutionally-mandated job for which you were elected and are being paid - I.e, United States Senator. Arrogance and high-handedness is deciding to subvert the will of the majority of the American people who twice elected Obama as our President because you were elected in a backwater state like Kentucky. You may recall that our President received 330 votes in the Electoral College. Arrogance and high-handedness is refusing to extend the basic courtesy of even meeting with one of the most highly-qualified individuals ever to be nomined to the Supreme Court. Clearly the lack of bipartisanship is solely the fault of our President.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is all Obama's fault for being so arrogant and high handed while in office. This is not political, it's personal . McConnell is giving Obama a kick in the ass on his way out the door and there's not a damn thing he can do about it. This is a great big FU to Obama who has certainly earned it. "I have a pen" he says if Congress doesn't do what he wants. Well McConnell shoved that pen right up Obama's ass. It showing the whole world that the master bullshiter Obama has no political skill at all when it comes right down to it.

Merrick Garland is a feckless ticket puncher who had to know Obama was just using him as a stalking horse, yet his ego wouldn't let him refuse a doomed from the start nomination.

For all if you whiny cry babies who say the Senate MUST hold hearings....there is no requirement that they do so on Obama's timetable. Face reality McConnell won, the left Lost.

Obama Derangement at it's finest.

The Obama was arrogant argument is such a false narrative.

And good luck, dipshit, when you have Hillary in office.

I'm a moderate Republican voter, and your comment is why Hillary may not win the election. That's not the way to get your typical Trump-voting males to vote for HRC.

Why the hell do you think I'm trying to sway anyone? I'm really just bringing this to it's highly likely conclusion. McConnell acts like an idiot and refuses to even consider a qualified moderate nominee, Hillary beats that asshole Trump and now we still have an open seat.

Unless the Senate (if still in Republican hands) refuses tp meet with anyone until they get a Republican president...which could lose them elections for quite a few years, definitely for president and very likely losing their grip on Congress.

Which all would be 100% alright with me, because I'm so tired of their toddler like behavior.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is all Obama's fault for being so arrogant and high handed while in office. This is not political, it's personal . McConnell is giving Obama a kick in the ass on his way out the door and there's not a damn thing he can do about it. This is a great big FU to Obama who has certainly earned it. "I have a pen" he says if Congress doesn't do what he wants. Well McConnell shoved that pen right up Obama's ass. It showing the whole world that the master bullshiter Obama has no political skill at all when it comes right down to it.

Merrick Garland is a feckless ticket puncher who had to know Obama was just using him as a stalking horse, yet his ego wouldn't let him refuse a doomed from the start nomination.

For all if you whiny cry babies who say the Senate MUST hold hearings....there is no requirement that they do so on Obama's timetable. Face reality McConnell won, the left Lost.

Obama Derangement at it's finest.

The Obama was arrogant argument is such a false narrative.

And good luck, dipshit, when you have Hillary in office.

I'm a moderate Republican voter, and your comment is why Hillary may not win the election. That's not the way to get your typical Trump-voting males to vote for HRC.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^Obama is in the fourth year of his presidency.

Correct. Apologies for my typo. I meant "after Obama's third year."

Actually, he's in the 8th year of his presidency and the fourth year of his 2nd term.

The man was elected to lead this country twice, but Senate leaders seem to think that for 25% of a President's term they shouldn't be allowed to do anything of substance. And people wonder why Washington has a reputation for being the place where nothing happens.

What isn't happening that you want to see happen? If it's a wish list of agenda items for a particular party, that's called partisanship.

Ideally, I'd like policy-furthering legislation of any flavor to pass...at least on issues of national importance (like biosecurity and export controls) where it's simply appalling that no progress has been made post-9/11. Yes, I'd prefer that legislation reflect my own views on how to accomplish these goals, but I'd prefer to have just about anything on the books to help regulate, for example, biological research that could be weaponized...or at a minimum leave our country better prepared to handle the aftermath of a biological weapons attack.

Realistically, I'd settle for a Congress that could pass appropriations bills in a timely fashion, preventing CR after CR which leads to horrible inefficiencies in government spending...and for one that could either get its act together to pass appropriations + tax bills that either don't require and increase in the debt ceiling or actually raise the debt ceiling without making our country look like it's run by idiots who don't understand that you don't get to pass spending bills telling government agencies to go run up obligations up to a certain level and then refuse to go out and get the money to actually pay for those obligations.

Actually, I have a government that literally can barely keep the lights on.

Anonymous wrote:This is all Obama's fault for being so arrogant and high handed while in office. This is not political, it's personal . McConnell is giving Obama a kick in the ass on his way out the door and there's not a damn thing he can do about it. This is a great big FU to Obama who has certainly earned it. "I have a pen" he says if Congress doesn't do what he wants. Well McConnell shoved that pen right up Obama's ass. It showing the whole world that the master bullshiter Obama has no political skill at all when it comes right down to it.

Merrick Garland is a feckless ticket puncher who had to know Obama was just using him as a stalking horse, yet his ego wouldn't let him refuse a doomed from the start nomination.

For all if you whiny cry babies who say the Senate MUST hold hearings....there is no requirement that they do so on Obama's timetable. Face reality McConnell won, the left Lost.

Hey moron, Obama was quoting Reagan when he made the pen comment.

And if you think McConnell already won, you are a fool.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^Obama is in the fourth year of his presidency.

Correct. Apologies for my typo. I meant "after Obama's third year."

Actually, he's in the 8th year of his presidency and the fourth year of his 2nd term.

The man was elected to lead this country twice, but Senate leaders seem to think that for 25% of a President's term they shouldn't be allowed to do anything of substance. And people wonder why Washington has a reputation for being the place where nothing happens.

Yes, yes, he was re-elected in 2012. And two thirds of this Senate were elected in 2012 and 2014 and 100% of the House was elected in 2014, so there you go. Check, meet balance.

That's irrelevant. The only person elected who has the constitutional responsibility to nominate SCOTUS justices is the President. There is nothing in the Constitution to suggest that Presidents aren't really supposed to carry out their Constitutional responsibility for 25% of any 4 year term (how would this play out if it were the fourth year of his first term, I wonder?). Likewise, the members of the Senate elected in both 2012 and 2014 have the Constitutional responsibility to "advise and consent" on the nominees, which has historically been done through hearings and votes. No one is saying they have an obligation to approve the President's nominee, but refusing to even give a hearing to a nominee for what would amount to 1/6 of each of their terms is shirking their responsibility.

I know it seems like we're really just electing parties sometimes, but the current primary season should make it clear that we're actually electing individual people. Like it or not, the current President was elected to the position that nominates appointees, not a group of Senators selected by a who have power disproportionate to the population they represent.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What's with all the posts brushing on anti-semitic? They have tone the same poster, right?

wait what? How is it anti-Semitic to point out facts?

You won't be black by any chance, correct?

Because all black are anti-Semitic You wouldn't be racist by any chance?

Nope. Because DCUM blacks often name-call those who dare to point out facts, so the bolded comment would be especially funny if coming from a black poster.

You won't be a stupid donkey by any chance?

Are you by any chance a high school dropout or just drunk?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What's with all the posts brushing on anti-semitic? They have tone the same poster, right?

wait what? How is it anti-Semitic to point out facts?

You won't be black by any chance, correct?

Because all black are anti-Semitic You wouldn't be racist by any chance?

Nope. Because DCUM blacks often name-call those who dare to point out facts, so the bolded comment would be especially funny if coming from a black poster.

You won't be a stupid donkey by any chance?

Anonymous wrote:This is all Obama's fault for being so arrogant and high handed while in office. This is not political, it's personal . McConnell is giving Obama a kick in the ass on his way out the door and there's not a damn thing he can do about it. This is a great big FU to Obama who has certainly earned it. "I have a pen" he says if Congress doesn't do what he wants. Well McConnell shoved that pen right up Obama's ass. It showing the whole world that the master bullshiter Obama has no political skill at all when it comes right down to it.

Merrick Garland is a feckless ticket puncher who had to know Obama was just using him as a stalking horse, yet his ego wouldn't let him refuse a doomed from the start nomination.

For all if you whiny cry babies who say the Senate MUST hold hearings....there is no requirement that they do so on Obama's timetable. Face reality McConnell won, the left Lost.

Obama Derangement at it's finest.

The Obama was arrogant argument is such a false narrative.

And good luck, dipshit, when you have Hillary in office.

This is all Obama's fault for being so arrogant and high handed while in office. This is not political, it's personal . McConnell is giving Obama a kick in the ass on his way out the door and there's not a damn thing he can do about it. This is a great big FU to Obama who has certainly earned it. "I have a pen" he says if Congress doesn't do what he wants. Well McConnell shoved that pen right up Obama's ass. It showing the whole world that the master bullshiter Obama has no political skill at all when it comes right down to it.

Merrick Garland is a feckless ticket puncher who had to know Obama was just using him as a stalking horse, yet his ego wouldn't let him refuse a doomed from the start nomination.

For all if you whiny cry babies who say the Senate MUST hold hearings....there is no requirement that they do so on Obama's timetable. Face reality McConnell won, the left Lost.

Anonymous wrote:I blame democrats for this mess - if you guys didn't sit on your ass in the midterms we wouldn't be in this problem!

Did you see the turnout in 2014? it was an alltime low!

Oh honey I was out there voting - but since we don't have Senators in the District there's not much any of us could do about it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^Obama is in the fourth year of his presidency.

Correct. Apologies for my typo. I meant "after Obama's third year."

Actually, he's in the 8th year of his presidency and the fourth year of his 2nd term.

The man was elected to lead this country twice, but Senate leaders seem to think that for 25% of a President's term they shouldn't be allowed to do anything of substance. And people wonder why Washington has a reputation for being the place where nothing happens.

What isn't happening that you want to see happen? If it's a wish list of agenda items for a particular party, that's called partisanship.

Wish list = hearing for a Supreme Court nominee. Maybe even meet with him, instead of refuse.

But that's partisanship, apparently.

For once, I'm glad they are refusing to do their jobs. This way we'll get a much younger, more liberal justice to sway the court over a much longer period of time when Hillary wins.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^Obama is in the fourth year of his presidency.

Correct. Apologies for my typo. I meant "after Obama's third year."

Actually, he's in the 8th year of his presidency and the fourth year of his 2nd term.

The man was elected to lead this country twice, but Senate leaders seem to think that for 25% of a President's term they shouldn't be allowed to do anything of substance. And people wonder why Washington has a reputation for being the place where nothing happens.

What isn't happening that you want to see happen? If it's a wish list of agenda items for a particular party, that's called partisanship.

There is so so much that I'd love to see these fools attempt to do.

But they'd rather just try to undo ACA over ... And over... And over

its like punching a wall for them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What's with all the posts brushing on anti-semitic? They have tone the same poster, right?

wait what? How is it anti-Semitic to point out facts?

You won't be black by any chance, correct?

Because all black are anti-Semitic You wouldn't be racist by any chance?