Anonymous
09/20/2020 21:32
Subject: RBG Politcal Discussion
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:“I simply ask Republicans in the Senate to give him (Garland) a fair hearing, and then an up-or-down vote,” Mr. Obama said then. (2016) “If you don’t, then it will not only be an abdication of the Senate’s constitutional duty, it will indicate a process for nominating and confirming judges that is beyond repair.”
What's the problem, Democrats?
Don't you want the Senate to give Trump's nomination a fair hearing like Obama asked?
Or is this another example of your famous, "Do what I say, not as I do," mission statement?
Do you really not see that the hipocrisy in on the republicans entirely? You all set this precedent. We pleaded with you not to. Now that the shoe is on the other foot, you want to ignore the precedent you set. The fact that so many posters here truly can't seem to get that is terrifying to me. There really is no hope for us if we can't agree on a baseline of facts and reality. I would feel better if you all just admitted to being hypocritical spineless power-grabbers, fully aware of your lies and deceit. At least that would make sense.
Do YOU not see the hypocrisy of the Democrats? They demanded a vote in 2016. They demand the opposite today. The shoe is on the other foot, but Democrats don't want to change the rules they originally fought against. It amazes and saddens me how democrats keep pushing the blame from themselves and can't see their own sanctimony
Are you serious? Do fairness and integrity mean nothing? The rules never should have been changed in 2016. But they were. And so to go back on it now just because it no longer benefits the Republicans is the height of hypocrisy.
OMG - just stop! You clearly have a very closed mind.
DP...no you are failing to see the utter power grab and hypocracy by the GOP here.
jealous, for sure!
and it's hypocrisy not hypocracy
DP. Interesting that you didn’t see fit to correct the PP (you?) in bold. It’s “hypocrisy,” not “hipocrisy.”
Anonymous
09/20/2020 21:28
Subject: RBG Politcal Discussion
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:So Murkowski and Collins are already out in favor do waiting. We need 3 people out this way to wait.
My sad prognosis is that these two rushing up front were doing so so they don’t have to be number 3. No one will be number 3. Such a sad shame. Could the historians in the room share some perspective? I’m just an engineer.
There needs to be 4. With only 3 Pence would break a tie. I wouldn't hold my breath.
What’s wrong with everyone doing their job and replacing the deceased SCOTUS justice? That’s their job.
Chips of death fall where they fall.
So put Merrick Garland on the court as he should be.
Exactly. If they wanted a truce, that's what they would do. The fact that js not even a consideration is the problem.
Isn’t Metrick a woman? We need a woman or PoC.
Anonymous
09/20/2020 21:26
Subject: RBG Politcal Discussion
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:So Murkowski and Collins are already out in favor do waiting. We need 3 people out this way to wait.
My sad prognosis is that these two rushing up front were doing so so they don’t have to be number 3. No one will be number 3. Such a sad shame. Could the historians in the room share some perspective? I’m just an engineer.
There needs to be 4. With only 3 Pence would break a tie. I wouldn't hold my breath.
What’s wrong with everyone doing their job and replacing the deceased SCOTUS justice? That’s their job.
Chips of death fall where they fall.
So put Merrick Garland on the court as he should be.
Exactly. If they wanted a truce, that's what they would do. The fact that js not even a consideration is the problem.
Anonymous
09/20/2020 21:23
Subject: RBG Politcal Discussion
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:So Murkowski and Collins are already out in favor do waiting. We need 3 people out this way to wait.
My sad prognosis is that these two rushing up front were doing so so they don’t have to be number 3. No one will be number 3. Such a sad shame. Could the historians in the room share some perspective? I’m just an engineer.
There needs to be 4. With only 3 Pence would break a tie. I wouldn't hold my breath.
What’s wrong with everyone doing their job and replacing the deceased SCOTUS justice? That’s their job.
Chips of death fall where they fall.
So put Merrick Garland on the court as he should be.
Anonymous
09/20/2020 21:21
Subject: RBG Politcal Discussion
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:So Murkowski and Collins are already out in favor do waiting. We need 3 people out this way to wait.
My sad prognosis is that these two rushing up front were doing so so they don’t have to be number 3. No one will be number 3. Such a sad shame. Could the historians in the room share some perspective? I’m just an engineer.
There needs to be 4. With only 3 Pence would break a tie. I wouldn't hold my breath.
What’s wrong with everyone doing their job and replacing the deceased SCOTUS justice? That’s their job.
Chips of death fall where they fall.
Anonymous
09/20/2020 21:20
Subject: RBG Politcal Discussion
To those of you who are arguing that Republicans had a change of heart and have come to the conclusion that they were wrong in 2016 - can you point me to any quotes from Senators attesting to this fact? Because all I see are various excuses about how this time is conveniently different.
Anonymous
09/20/2020 21:04
Subject: RBG Politcal Discussion
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:“I simply ask Republicans in the Senate to give him (Garland) a fair hearing, and then an up-or-down vote,” Mr. Obama said then. (2016) “If you don’t, then it will not only be an abdication of the Senate’s constitutional duty, it will indicate a process for nominating and confirming judges that is beyond repair.”
What's the problem, Democrats?
Don't you want the Senate to give Trump's nomination a fair hearing like Obama asked?
Or is this another example of your famous, "Do what I say, not as I do," mission statement?
Do you really not see that the hipocrisy in on the republicans entirely? You all set this precedent. We pleaded with you not to. Now that the shoe is on the other foot, you want to ignore the precedent you set. The fact that so many posters here truly can't seem to get that is terrifying to me. There really is no hope for us if we can't agree on a baseline of facts and reality. I would feel better if you all just admitted to being hypocritical spineless power-grabbers, fully aware of your lies and deceit. At least that would make sense.
Do YOU not see the hypocrisy of the Democrats? They demanded a vote in 2016. They demand the opposite today. The shoe is on the other foot, but Democrats don't want to change the rules they originally fought against. It amazes and saddens me how democrats keep pushing the blame from themselves and can't see their own sanctimony
The demand the opposite today BECAUSE there was no vote in 2016.
+1. What is the Republican excuse for changing their position?
to appease the liberals.
We are not appeased, so that ain't it.
Anonymous
09/20/2020 20:59
Subject: RBG Politcal Discussion
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:“I simply ask Republicans in the Senate to give him (Garland) a fair hearing, and then an up-or-down vote,” Mr. Obama said then. (2016) “If you don’t, then it will not only be an abdication of the Senate’s constitutional duty, it will indicate a process for nominating and confirming judges that is beyond repair.”
What's the problem, Democrats?
Don't you want the Senate to give Trump's nomination a fair hearing like Obama asked?
Or is this another example of your famous, "Do what I say, not as I do," mission statement?
Do you really not see that the hipocrisy in on the republicans entirely? You all set this precedent. We pleaded with you not to. Now that the shoe is on the other foot, you want to ignore the precedent you set. The fact that so many posters here truly can't seem to get that is terrifying to me. There really is no hope for us if we can't agree on a baseline of facts and reality. I would feel better if you all just admitted to being hypocritical spineless power-grabbers, fully aware of your lies and deceit. At least that would make sense.
Do YOU not see the hypocrisy of the Democrats? They demanded a vote in 2016. They demand the opposite today. The shoe is on the other foot, but Democrats don't want to change the rules they originally fought against. It amazes and saddens me how democrats keep pushing the blame from themselves and can't see their own sanctimony
The demand the opposite today BECAUSE there was no vote in 2016.
+1. What is the Republican excuse for changing their position?
to appease the liberals.
Please explain how this appeases liberals.
Anonymous
09/20/2020 20:55
Subject: RBG Politcal Discussion
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:“I simply ask Republicans in the Senate to give him (Garland) a fair hearing, and then an up-or-down vote,” Mr. Obama said then. (2016) “If you don’t, then it will not only be an abdication of the Senate’s constitutional duty, it will indicate a process for nominating and confirming judges that is beyond repair.”
What's the problem, Democrats?
Don't you want the Senate to give Trump's nomination a fair hearing like Obama asked?
Or is this another example of your famous, "Do what I say, not as I do," mission statement?
Do you really not see that the hipocrisy in on the republicans entirely? You all set this precedent. We pleaded with you not to. Now that the shoe is on the other foot, you want to ignore the precedent you set. The fact that so many posters here truly can't seem to get that is terrifying to me. There really is no hope for us if we can't agree on a baseline of facts and reality. I would feel better if you all just admitted to being hypocritical spineless power-grabbers, fully aware of your lies and deceit. At least that would make sense.
Do YOU not see the hypocrisy of the Democrats? They demanded a vote in 2016. They demand the opposite today. The shoe is on the other foot, but Democrats don't want to change the rules they originally fought against. It amazes and saddens me how democrats keep pushing the blame from themselves and can't see their own sanctimony
Are you serious? Do fairness and integrity mean nothing? The rules never should have been changed in 2016. But they were. And so to go back on it now just because it no longer benefits the Republicans is the height of hypocrisy.
OMG - just stop! You clearly have a very closed mind.
DP...no you are failing to see the utter power grab and hypocracy by the GOP here.
Effective hypocrisy requires that you play innocent, so I am quite sure they do see it and think they can get away with it.
Anonymous
09/20/2020 20:55
Subject: RBG Politcal Discussion
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:“I simply ask Republicans in the Senate to give him (Garland) a fair hearing, and then an up-or-down vote,” Mr. Obama said then. (2016) “If you don’t, then it will not only be an abdication of the Senate’s constitutional duty, it will indicate a process for nominating and confirming judges that is beyond repair.”
What's the problem, Democrats?
Don't you want the Senate to give Trump's nomination a fair hearing like Obama asked?
Or is this another example of your famous, "Do what I say, not as I do," mission statement?
Do you really not see that the hipocrisy in on the republicans entirely? You all set this precedent. We pleaded with you not to. Now that the shoe is on the other foot, you want to ignore the precedent you set. The fact that so many posters here truly can't seem to get that is terrifying to me. There really is no hope for us if we can't agree on a baseline of facts and reality. I would feel better if you all just admitted to being hypocritical spineless power-grabbers, fully aware of your lies and deceit. At least that would make sense.
Do YOU not see the hypocrisy of the Democrats? They demanded a vote in 2016. They demand the opposite today. The shoe is on the other foot, but Democrats don't want to change the rules they originally fought against. It amazes and saddens me how democrats keep pushing the blame from themselves and can't see their own sanctimony
The demand the opposite today BECAUSE there was no vote in 2016.
+1. What is the Republican excuse for changing their position?
to appease the liberals.
Anonymous
09/20/2020 20:54
Subject: RBG Politcal Discussion
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:“I simply ask Republicans in the Senate to give him (Garland) a fair hearing, and then an up-or-down vote,” Mr. Obama said then. (2016) “If you don’t, then it will not only be an abdication of the Senate’s constitutional duty, it will indicate a process for nominating and confirming judges that is beyond repair.”
What's the problem, Democrats?
Don't you want the Senate to give Trump's nomination a fair hearing like Obama asked?
Or is this another example of your famous, "Do what I say, not as I do," mission statement?
Do you really not see that the hipocrisy in on the republicans entirely? You all set this precedent. We pleaded with you not to. Now that the shoe is on the other foot, you want to ignore the precedent you set. The fact that so many posters here truly can't seem to get that is terrifying to me. There really is no hope for us if we can't agree on a baseline of facts and reality. I would feel better if you all just admitted to being hypocritical spineless power-grabbers, fully aware of your lies and deceit. At least that would make sense.
Do YOU not see the hypocrisy of the Democrats? They demanded a vote in 2016. They demand the opposite today. The shoe is on the other foot, but Democrats don't want to change the rules they originally fought against. It amazes and saddens me how democrats keep pushing the blame from themselves and can't see their own sanctimony
Are you serious? Do fairness and integrity mean nothing? The rules never should have been changed in 2016. But they were. And so to go back on it now just because it no longer benefits the Republicans is the height of hypocrisy.
OMG - just stop! You clearly have a very closed mind.
DP...no you are failing to see the utter power grab and hypocracy by the GOP here.
jealous, for sure!
and it's hypocrisy not hypocracy
Anonymous
09/20/2020 20:53
Subject: RBG Politcal Discussion
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:“I simply ask Republicans in the Senate to give him (Garland) a fair hearing, and then an up-or-down vote,” Mr. Obama said then. (2016) “If you don’t, then it will not only be an abdication of the Senate’s constitutional duty, it will indicate a process for nominating and confirming judges that is beyond repair.”
What's the problem, Democrats?
Don't you want the Senate to give Trump's nomination a fair hearing like Obama asked?
Or is this another example of your famous, "Do what I say, not as I do," mission statement?
Do you really not see that the hipocrisy in on the republicans entirely? You all set this precedent. We pleaded with you not to. Now that the shoe is on the other foot, you want to ignore the precedent you set. The fact that so many posters here truly can't seem to get that is terrifying to me. There really is no hope for us if we can't agree on a baseline of facts and reality. I would feel better if you all just admitted to being hypocritical spineless power-grabbers, fully aware of your lies and deceit. At least that would make sense.
Do YOU not see the hypocrisy of the Democrats? They demanded a vote in 2016. They demand the opposite today. The shoe is on the other foot, but Democrats don't want to change the rules they originally fought against. It amazes and saddens me how democrats keep pushing the blame from themselves and can't see their own sanctimony
Are you serious? Do fairness and integrity mean nothing? The rules never should have been changed in 2016. But they were. And so to go back on it now just because it no longer benefits the Republicans is the height of hypocrisy.
OMG - just stop! You clearly have a very closed mind.
DP...no you are failing to see the utter power grab and hypocracy by the GOP here.
Anonymous
09/20/2020 20:46
Subject: RBG Politcal Discussion
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:“I simply ask Republicans in the Senate to give him (Garland) a fair hearing, and then an up-or-down vote,” Mr. Obama said then. (2016) “If you don’t, then it will not only be an abdication of the Senate’s constitutional duty, it will indicate a process for nominating and confirming judges that is beyond repair.”
What's the problem, Democrats?
Don't you want the Senate to give Trump's nomination a fair hearing like Obama asked?
Or is this another example of your famous, "Do what I say, not as I do," mission statement?
Do you really not see that the hipocrisy in on the republicans entirely? You all set this precedent. We pleaded with you not to. Now that the shoe is on the other foot, you want to ignore the precedent you set. The fact that so many posters here truly can't seem to get that is terrifying to me. There really is no hope for us if we can't agree on a baseline of facts and reality. I would feel better if you all just admitted to being hypocritical spineless power-grabbers, fully aware of your lies and deceit. At least that would make sense.
Do YOU not see the hypocrisy of the Democrats? They demanded a vote in 2016. They demand the opposite today. The shoe is on the other foot, but Democrats don't want to change the rules they originally fought against. It amazes and saddens me how democrats keep pushing the blame from themselves and can't see their own sanctimony
The demand the opposite today BECAUSE there was no vote in 2016.
+1. What is the Republican excuse for changing their position?
Anonymous
09/20/2020 20:46
Subject: RBG Politcal Discussion
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:“I simply ask Republicans in the Senate to give him (Garland) a fair hearing, and then an up-or-down vote,” Mr. Obama said then. (2016) “If you don’t, then it will not only be an abdication of the Senate’s constitutional duty, it will indicate a process for nominating and confirming judges that is beyond repair.”
What's the problem, Democrats?
Don't you want the Senate to give Trump's nomination a fair hearing like Obama asked?
Or is this another example of your famous, "Do what I say, not as I do," mission statement?
Do you really not see that the hipocrisy in on the republicans entirely? You all set this precedent. We pleaded with you not to. Now that the shoe is on the other foot, you want to ignore the precedent you set. The fact that so many posters here truly can't seem to get that is terrifying to me. There really is no hope for us if we can't agree on a baseline of facts and reality. I would feel better if you all just admitted to being hypocritical spineless power-grabbers, fully aware of your lies and deceit. At least that would make sense.
Do YOU not see the hypocrisy of the Democrats? They demanded a vote in 2016. They demand the opposite today. The shoe is on the other foot, but Democrats don't want to change the rules they originally fought against. It amazes and saddens me how democrats keep pushing the blame from themselves and can't see their own sanctimony
Are you serious? Do fairness and integrity mean nothing? The rules never should have been changed in 2016. But they were. And so to go back on it now just because it no longer benefits the Republicans is the height of hypocrisy.
OMG - just stop! You clearly have a very closed mind.
Anonymous
09/20/2020 20:45
Subject: RBG Politcal Discussion
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:“I simply ask Republicans in the Senate to give him (Garland) a fair hearing, and then an up-or-down vote,” Mr. Obama said then. (2016) “If you don’t, then it will not only be an abdication of the Senate’s constitutional duty, it will indicate a process for nominating and confirming judges that is beyond repair.”
What's the problem, Democrats?
Don't you want the Senate to give Trump's nomination a fair hearing like Obama asked?
Or is this another example of your famous, "Do what I say, not as I do," mission statement?
Do you really not see that the hipocrisy in on the republicans entirely? You all set this precedent. We pleaded with you not to. Now that the shoe is on the other foot, you want to ignore the precedent you set. The fact that so many posters here truly can't seem to get that is terrifying to me. There really is no hope for us if we can't agree on a baseline of facts and reality. I would feel better if you all just admitted to being hypocritical spineless power-grabbers, fully aware of your lies and deceit. At least that would make sense.
Do YOU not see the hypocrisy of the Democrats? They demanded a vote in 2016. They demand the opposite today. The shoe is on the other foot, but Democrats don't want to change the rules they originally fought against. It amazes and saddens me how democrats keep pushing the blame from themselves and can't see their own sanctimony
The demand the opposite today BECAUSE there was no vote in 2016.
+1. They demand the opposite because McConnell just revealed that a Republican controlled Senate will never let a Democratic President choose a Supreme Court justice again. This isn't about "letting the American people decide" as McConnell claimed in 2016. This is about dereliction of Constitutional duties to own the libs.