Active Users:208 Time:23/04/2024 03:14:34 PM
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules
You should try to use less buzzwords and rhetoric. beetnemesis Send a noteboard - 02/06/2016 07:17:25 PM

This seems pretty simple to me.

  • The president appoints Supreme Court justices.

  • The Senate acts as a check on that, by vetting and approving (or disapproving) the choice.


This Senate is neither vetting nor disapproving of choices, they're simply saying "No, we won't let the President appoint someone."

It would be one thing if the Senate objected to various potential justices, but it's not even that. It's literally, "We don't like this, so let's shut down this entire process."


It's not that surprising- that's basically been the Republican strategy for all of Obama's tenure. I live in DC, I remember when the GOP literally let the federal government shut down for a week out of spite.


Saying "There's nothing in the Constitution that says the Senate has to vote on a nominee" is silly. It's like sitting in the backseat of a car with your brother and going "Ha, ha, I'm not touching youuu" while waving your hand in front of his face.

My original point was that it's embarrassing. It's not an example of good governance, or honorable behavior.

I amuse myself.
Reply to message
it's been over 90 days.... moondog - 18/05/2016 07:22:55 PM 679 Views
Oh come on, this is nothing the Dems haven't done before. *NM* TyrReborn - 19/05/2016 09:09:20 PM 237 Views
Where does the Constitution say a woman can't nominate justices, or that there is time limit? Cannoli - 20/05/2016 09:14:13 PM 414 Views
It has been over 90 days the far left liberals and the media lap dogs started this line of BS random thoughts - 23/05/2016 04:49:00 PM 364 Views
This is pretty obviously a "letter of the law, not the spirit" thing beetnemesis - 31/05/2016 05:35:30 PM 524 Views
It is pretty obvious that they are violating neither the spirt nor the letter random thoughts - 31/05/2016 08:24:07 PM 396 Views
You should try to use less buzzwords and rhetoric. beetnemesis - 02/06/2016 07:17:25 PM 516 Views
You mean like the rhetoric of claiming something is a violation of the Constitution? random thoughts - 03/06/2016 05:30:01 PM 366 Views
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules

Reply to Message

Block Quote Paragraph Quote
Formatting
Smiley Codes