Amy Coney Barrett

[Voltaire 4,560]

So another day came and went without a nominee?

 

[FlyinHeadlock 459]

2 minutes ago, Voltaire said:

So another day came and went without a nominee?

 

 

[Voltaire 4,560]

10 hours ago, FlyinHeadlock said:

. Looks like the country will be spared gang raping and beer drinking this time.   

Senate Judiciary Committee members,

Judge Barrett unlawfully conducted an undercover investigation into my private affairs. She held me shamelessly for the questioning since she was convinced that I was withholding evidence from her. But this wasn't the case, I am willing to swear under oath that I exposed everything to her. She knew every detail intimately. Still, she continued to detain me, hold me, and hold me, and hold me still more for questioning as she accused me repeatedly of hiding the truth.  I was a victim of a deep anal probe investigation conducted personally by Judge Barrett who showed no remorse in badgering me as she forced a guilty confession out of me even as I plead repeatedly for much lighter charges.

Judiciary Committee members, I would now like to show to you proof of the great damages Judge Barrett inflicted on me during these questioning sessions.

[FlyinHeadlock 459]

1 minute ago, Voltaire said:

Senate Judiciary Committee members,

Judge Barrett unlawfully conducted an undercover investigation into my private affairs. She held me shamelessly for the questioning since she was convinced that I was withholding evidence from her. But this wasn't the case, I am willing to swear under oath that I exposed everything to her. She knew every detain intimately. Still, she continued to hold me, and hold me, and hold me still more for questioning as she accused me repeatedly of hiding the truth.  I was a victim of a deep anal probe investigation conducted personally by Judge Barrett who showed no remorse in badgering me as she forced a guilty confession out of me even as I plead for for much lighter charges.

Judiciary Committee members, I would now like to show to you proof of the great damages Judge Barrett inflicted on me during these questioning sessions.

Saturday was my response. Trump said Saturday.

[shorepatrol 1,737]

 

[FlyinHeadlock 459]

1 minute ago, shorepatrol said:

 

I can't see what you posted but Saturday a justice will be nominated and confirmed in about a month. I'm fine with either party doing it. I may not like it but I do like the rule of law. Rule of law says it can be done. If everyone followed the rule of law we would be in much better shape. Like enforcing illegal immigration laws for one until rules are changed instead of throwing money feces on the current laws and saying phuck it.

[shorepatrol 1,737]

4 minutes ago, FlyinHeadlock said:

I can't see what you posted but Saturday a justice will be nominated and confirmed in about a month. I'm fine with either party doing it. I may not like it but I do like the rule of law. Rule of law says it can be done. If everyone followed the rule of law we would be in much better shape. Like enforcing illegal immigration laws for one until rules are changed instead of throwing money feces on the current laws and saying phuck it.

It shows fine for me. Weird. 

[Voltaire 4,560]

8 minutes ago, shorepatrol said:

 

The woman from timestamp 1:45 to -1:50, makes two valid points that I agree with completely.

[Mr. Hand 482]

1 hour ago, Voltaire said:

So another day came and went without a nominee?

 

Trump said he will announce late Saturday afternoon 

[Voltaire 4,560]

2 minutes ago, Mr. Hand said:

Trump said he will announce late Saturday afternoon 

Time is constrained and he just eats a week?.... I mean, I'm sure he's getting good advice from people who know way better than me how to make this work properly and effectively but my instincts would be to make a nomination as soon as a candidate indicated she was willing to put on her helmet and game face and mentally prepared to enter the hornets nest of Kavanaughx10 insanity.

[Hardcore troubadour 12,653]

1 minute ago, Voltaire said:

Time is constrained and he just eats a week?.... I mean, I'm sure he's getting good advice from people who know way better than me how to make this work properly and effectively but my instincts would be to make a nomination as soon as a candidate indicated she was willing to put on her helmet and game face and mentally prepared to enter the hornets nest of Kavanaughx10 insanity.

He’s waiting until RBG is buried. It seems like you look for reasons to go after him. 

[Voltaire 4,560]

9 hours ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

He’s waiting until RBG is buried. It seems like you look for reasons to go after him. 

What? No.

I've been all in re-electing Trump since year two although I did pick up an affinity for Tulsi Gabbard, Andrew Yang and that guy from Maryland along the way in the expanded Dem field. Meanwhile, I was for replacing RBG, depending on circumstances, while doctors were still trying to revive her or else the moment before her corpse hit the floor.

And why are you suddenly questioning my motives? We've been close since you started posting here. I hope you haven't started sampling koolaid from that demihumanoid turd Delusional Observer's toilet too.

[Hardcore troubadour 12,653]

17 minutes ago, Voltaire said:

What? No.

I've been all in re-electing Trump since year two although I did pick up an affinity for Tulsi Gabbard, Andrew Yang and that guy from Maryland along the way in the expanded Dem field. Meanwhile, I was for replacing RBG, depending on circumstances, while doctors were still trying to revive her or else the moment before her corpse hit the floor.

And why are you suddenly questioning my motives? We've been close since you started posting here. I hope you haven't started sampling koolaid from that demihumoid turd Delusional Observer's toilet too.

I’m sorry. I just sensed you were looking for a reason to criticize, bad read on my part. 

[FlyinHeadlock 459]

1 hour ago, shorepatrol said:

It shows fine for me. Weird. 

Your mom is weird but I like weird. Just for a night though.

[TimmySmith 2,782]

8 hours ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

He’s waiting until RBG is buried. It seems like you look for reasons to go after him. 

Voltaire is the most politically interesting person here. Completely anti-partisan. Pro-USA, the real USA of the people... I think we could start up a proper movement based entirely on his opinions. He has done his username proud.

[drobeski 3,061]

9 hours ago, shorepatrol said:

 

Honcho ?

[Voltaire 4,560]

1 hour ago, TimmySmith said:

Voltaire is the most politically interesting person here. Completely anti-partisan. Pro-USA, the real USA of the people... I think we could start up a proper movement based entirely on his opinions. He has done his username proud.

Thanks. I appreciate that.

[FlyinHeadlock 459]

Andrew Yang, lost all interest with his 1K a month for shltting and sleeping universal basic laziness. I watched a segment on one of the recipients. Fat loser, out of work for a year. But, he had a sports car in the driveway. Reporter failed to ask why not deliver food or do Uber with that fine machine in the driveway. Said the money helped pay for his daughter's college (also a fatazz). I guess not eating shlt all the time and joining the reserves for free college, health insurance and income is just too phucking difficult.

[Voltaire 4,560]

12 minutes ago, FlyinHeadlock said:

Andrew Yang, lost all interest with his 1K a month for shltting and sleeping universal basic laziness. I watched a segment on one of the recipients. Fat loser, out of work for a year. But, he had a sports car in the driveway. Reporter failed to ask why not deliver food or do Uber with that fine machine in the driveway. Said the money helped pay for his daughter's college (also a fatazz). I guess not eating shlt all the time and joining the reserves for free college, health insurance and income is just too phucking difficult.

I'd not thought to look into the reserves. Maybe I should. I'd went in on active duty and finished up in the Michigan National Guard. Reserves weren't on my mind. Since my sister (together with my mother) amazingly by luck, bought a house so very extremely close to an Air National Guard base( my sister has Michigan State police officers next door on both sides and a few more down the street and her neighborhood is full of American and Thin Blue Line flags) , I'd thought I'd direct my kids there for tuition assistance. But, in truth, the Michigan National Guard benefits are rather mediocre when compared to other states. The best thing about the kids staying with my sister/mom would be no room and board and her extreme proximity to the base were they to join.

Michigan National Guard education benefits doesn't cover all college expenses. If the Reserves do... I need to start thinking of that. Also ROTC as I know fock all nothing of how ROTC works other than it's a heck of a lot better than being enlisted.

[Hardcore troubadour 12,653]

2 hours ago, TimmySmith said:

Voltaire is the most politically interesting person here. Completely anti-partisan. Pro-USA, the real USA of the people... I think we could start up a proper movement based entirely on his opinions. He has done his username proud.

Agree. It’s good to get a perspective on  things from a distance. 

[Groundhog 24]

Barrett's credentials look impeccable. Assuming that the Senate vote splits more or less along party lines (Collins can be an exception, who cares, it would take 4 aisle-crossers to put the vote in jeopardy), and assuming that McConnell is greasing the wheels to have this happen lightning-fast, I expect she will be appointed before the election. 

I am socially liberal and fiscally conservative. So I kind of have one foot on both sides of the aisle. And quite honestly, the level of enmity and loathing that so many on this board seem to have for anyone that is a Democrat is, I think, dangerous. The same goes for Democrats who mock and deride Trump supporters. It's dangerous because IMHO there's a very thin veneer of civilization. When you can oh-so-easily argue that the other side is dangerous, it makes it easier for you to support violence and extremism against that side. 

Trump is making a calculated bet that threats of civil disorder help him no matter what happens - and he's probably right. If cities experience more riots, violence and looting etc., it makes voters more willing for someone with a firm hand to step in and solve it. And if his rhetoric manages to stifle riots, violence and looting, he can claim victory that his leadership is quelling those things before they get out of hand. He foments this kind of stuff, because the more normal things seem ahead of the election, the easier it is for voters to entertain the idea of switching to Biden. This is the same reason why the 'terror threat' kept getting raised ahead of the 2004 election - also won by the incumbent. 

I don't dismiss GOP supporters - after all, I'm fiscally conservative. But when Trump is your flag-carrier, a vote for Trump is a vote for a monarchy. He has done his level best to erode checks and balances within a democracy, encourages violence against opponents or those who question him (e.g., reporters), and basically wants to be an absolute ruler. Thus the admiration for leaders of banana republics like North Korea, or strongman regimes like Russia. And given his history - being the king of the Trump empire and answerable to no one - why would he want to change now? So in this election, I'll vote for Biden. I don't think a GOP win this time is worth the cost to democracy. 

 

[Hardcore troubadour 12,653]

2 minutes ago, Groundhog said:

Barrett's credentials look impeccable. Assuming that the Senate vote splits more or less along party lines (Collins can be an exception, who cares, it would take 4 aisle-crossers to put the vote in jeopardy), and assuming that McConnell is greasing the wheels to have this happen lightning-fast, I expect she will be appointed before the election. 

I am socially liberal and fiscally conservative. So I kind of have one foot on both sides of the aisle. And quite honestly, the level of enmity and loathing that so many on this board seem to have for anyone that is a Democrat is, I think, dangerous. The same goes for Democrats who mock and deride Trump supporters. It's dangerous because IMHO there's a very thin veneer of civilization. When you can oh-so-easily argue that the other side is dangerous, it makes it easier for you to support violence and extremism against that side. 

Trump is making a calculated bet that threats of civil disorder help him no matter what happens - and he's probably right. If cities experience more riots, violence and looting etc., it makes voters more willing for someone with a firm hand to step in and solve it. And if his rhetoric manages to stifle riots, violence and looting, he can claim victory that his leadership is quelling those things before they get out of hand. He foments this kind of stuff, because the more normal things seem ahead of the election, the easier it is for voters to entertain the idea of switching to Biden. This is the same reason why the 'terror threat' kept getting raised ahead of the 2004 election - also won by the incumbent. 

I don't dismiss GOP supporters - after all, I'm fiscally conservative. But when Trump is your flag-carrier, a vote for Trump is a vote for a monarchy. He has done his level best to erode checks and balances within a democracy, encourages violence against opponents or those who question him (e.g., reporters), and basically wants to be an absolute ruler. Thus the admiration for leaders of banana republics like North Korea, or strongman regimes like Russia. And given his history - being the king of the Trump empire and answerable to no one - why would he want to change now? So in this election, I'll vote for Biden. I don't think a GOP win this time is worth the cost to democracy. 

 

Russian Hoax

Fake Impeachment

Disgusting Kavanaugh hearings

Leftists rioting and burning cities 

Crime Rising because of liberal reforms

Stop acting like at this time in history it’s even sided. One is worse. Much worse. 

[FlyinHeadlock 459]

35 minutes ago, Voltaire said:

I'd not thought to look into the reserves. Maybe I should. I'd went in on active duty and finished up in the Michigan National Guard. Reserves weren't on my mind. Since my sister (together with my mother) amazingly by luck, bought a house so very extremely close to an Air National Guard base( my sister has Michigan State police officers next door on both sides and a few more down the street and her neighborhood is full of American and Thin Blue Line flags) , I'd thought I'd direct my kids there for tuition assistance. But, in truth, the Michigan National Guard benefits are rather mediocre when compared to other states. The best thing about the kids staying with my sister/mom would be no room and board and her extreme proximity to the base were they to join.

Michigan National Guard education benefits doesn't cover all college expenses. If the Reserves do... I need to start thinking of that. Also ROTC as I know fock all nothing of how ROTC works other than it's a heck of a lot better than being enlisted.

National Guard last I checked pays tuition and has cheap healthcare. They are not going to pay for housing, food, books, paper, pens. This is where getting a part time job comes in and getting a roomate(s). Maybe even go to school part time, earn money then go back next semester full time.

This is what most of me and my friends did. We all finished school, got good jobs and graduated with no debt. The people I know who took out massive loans or the parents paid, they are not doing well. They enter the real world either heavily in debt or, hard finding a good entry level job because they have no experience working with other people or any applied skill. The job market is flooded with them. Me and my Guard buddies never had that problem. We always got hired.  

 

[TBayXXXVII 2,117]

13 hours ago, Voltaire said:

So another day came and went without a nominee?

 

Monday, Trump said it would happen "later this week".

[Voltaire 4,560]

McConnell has seemed to secure his 51 votes, he has lost Murkowski and Collins looks to be undecided but he's secured Romney and convinced Grassley and Graham to eat crow on not voting for SCOTUS nominees in the final year of a presidency. The Dems seem out of options, they would need to get Murkowski to vote no rather than abstain, get Collins to do the same, steal two more Republicans, and hold onto all of their votes. In other words, it's nearly a done deal.

Now we just have to get everyone involved to put on their helmet, their game face, clench their teeth, stay focused and see the sh*tshow circus through to the bitter end.

[RLLD 3,455]

16 minutes ago, Voltaire said:

McConnell has seemed to secure his 51 votes, he has lost Murkowski and Collins looks to be undecided but he's secured Romney and convinced Grassley and Graham to eat crow on not voting for SCOTUS nominees in the final year of a presidency. The Dems seem out of options, they would need to get Murkowski to vote no rather than abstain, get Collins to do the same, steal two more Republicans, and hold onto all of their votes. In other words, it's nearly a done deal.

Now we just have to get everyone involved to put on their helmet, their game face, clench their teeth, stay focused and see the sh*tshow circus through to the bitter end.

Apparently they have other arrows....I think it unwise to believe they will not take extreme action, they have already done so recently

[TimmySmith 2,782]

12 minutes ago, Voltaire said:

McConnell has seemed to secure his 51 votes, he has lost Murkowski and Collins looks to be undecided but he's secured Romney and convinced Grassley and Graham to eat crow on not voting for SCOTUS nominees in the final year of a presidency. The Dems seem out of options, they would need to get Murkowski to vote no rather than abstain, get Collins to do the same, steal two more Republicans, and hold onto all of their votes. In other words, it's nearly a done deal.

Now we just have to get everyone involved to put on their helmet, their game face, clench their teeth, stay focused and see the sh*tshow circus through to the bitter end.

This is incredibly telling about the future of the Senate.  The Republicans hold a huge margin currently, and have 23 seats to defend out of 35. You won't see a better time for a switch. But the Democrats have run the numbers and realize that they can't get there.  So the only thing they can do is let the process go through and use it as campaign fodder to hopefully pick up a seat or 2.   More evidence that the state of the Democratic party is WAY worse than we know.

[Strike 3,979]

1 minute ago, RLLD said:

Apparently they have other arrows....I think it unwise to believe they will not take extreme action, they have already done so recently

They do.  I've heard things like:

1)  Shut down the government

2) Senators just don't show up and force the gov't to forcibly find them and bring them.

3) Impeachment

They have to balance their desire to avoid this SCOTUS appointment and the impact it may have on voters.  There are still a lot of Americans that understand how the government works and would see most, if not all, of those actions as the actions of a petulant child not getting their way. 

[FlyinHeadlock 459]

If Dems go full frontal assault they are going to pay for it. Trump is not that strong with women but start going after this woman with 7 kids, 2 adopted, he's going to pickpocket some of those women Dems though they had.

[TimmySmith 2,782]

1 minute ago, FlyinHeadlock said:

If Dems go full frontal assault they are going to pay for it. Trump is not that strong with women but start going after this woman with 7 kids, 2 adopted, he's going to pickpocket some of those women Dems though they had.

They can only attack the process, and they will, ad nauseum.

[FlyinHeadlock 459]

4 minutes ago, TimmySmith said:

They can only attack the process, and they will, ad nauseum.

Word is abortion. Process for sure but her personally it will be on abortion. It will backfire though when they start talking about late term abortion or out of the womb throw aways.

[TimmySmith 2,782]

12 minutes ago, FlyinHeadlock said:

Word is abortion. Process for sure but her personally it will be on abortion. It will backfire though when they start talking about late term abortion or out of the womb throw aways.

I agree that they will grill her on this.  Abortion on demand is not, and never has been, the law of the land, but the left plays it like that.  Her stance will be that she will not overturn Roe v. Wade, and that is as far as she will go.

[Voltaire 4,560]

17 minutes ago, Groundhog said:

Barrett's credentials look impeccable. Assuming that the Senate vote splits more or less along party lines (Collins can be an exception, who cares, it would take 4 aisle-crossers to put the vote in jeopardy), and assuming that McConnell is greasing the wheels to have this happen lightning-fast, I expect she will be appointed before the election. 

I am socially liberal and fiscally conservative. So I kind of have one foot on both sides of the aisle. And quite honestly, the level of enmity and loathing that so many on this board seem to have for anyone that is a Democrat is, I think, dangerous. The same goes for Democrats who mock and deride Trump supporters. It's dangerous because IMHO there's a very thin veneer of civilization. When you can oh-so-easily argue that the other side is dangerous, it makes it easier for you to support violence and extremism against that side. 

Trump is making a calculated bet that threats of civil disorder help him no matter what happens - and he's probably right. If cities experience more riots, violence and looting etc., it makes voters more willing for someone with a firm hand to step in and solve it. And if his rhetoric manages to stifle riots, violence and looting, he can claim victory that his leadership is quelling those things before they get out of hand. He foments this kind of stuff, because the more normal things seem ahead of the election, the easier it is for voters to entertain the idea of switching to Biden. This is the same reason why the 'terror threat' kept getting raised ahead of the 2004 election - also won by the incumbent. 

I don't dismiss GOP supporters - after all, I'm fiscally conservative. But when Trump is your flag-carrier, a vote for Trump is a vote for a monarchy. He has done his level best to erode checks and balances within a democracy, encourages violence against opponents or those who question him (e.g., reporters), and basically wants to be an absolute ruler. Thus the admiration for leaders of banana republics like North Korea, or strongman regimes like Russia. And given his history - being the king of the Trump empire and answerable to no one - why would he want to change now? So in this election, I'll vote for Biden. I don't think a GOP win this time is worth the cost to democracy. 

 

How is Trump a vote for monarchy? He's dangerous in what way? He abides by every judicial ruling against him, he's withheld from sending in federal law enforcement from rioting communities that do not request them, he's kept us out of wars and has secured three peace deals in the last month, literally bringing peace to the Middle East which has eluded every president before him since Jimmy Carter. He's been fully exonerated by an independent commission on charges of Russia collusion and aquitted by the Senate on bullsh*t Ukraine hoax.

The Democrats are not condemning/allowing rioting in the streets, many activly support it. Joe Biden is baerly functional, maybe you like his staff, thirteen of them donate to pay the bail of violent arsonist and rioters and his VP condones this as well.  The Democrats are the ones that promotes critical race theory (anti-white racism), promotes anti-police rhetoric to include defunding the police, the impeached Trump for no reason, accused Brett Kavanaugh of rape based on zero evidence, they are threatening to eliminate the filibuster (and were the ones who eliminated it on judicial vacancies) , they're the ones threatening to stack the courts, they want to defund the police, the left preaches anti-white racism and that Mt. Rushmore is a monument to white supremacy, the Big Tech left bullies and censors opposing voices online in a total disregard for free speech, they protest at politicians homes. They aren't terribly offended when Washington and Jefferson statues topple or murals get covered up and it's the left that renamed a Laura Ingells Wilder award for children writers because they found Laura to be too offensive. the 1619 project wants to destroy our institutions, the left caters to them, yet Trump is the danger? the monarch? You watch too much CNN and MSNBC.

Are you on the side of the people that renamed the Laura Ingalls Wilder book award or the side of the people that tell those people to go fock themselves? Are you on the side of America is a great but flawed nation conceived in liberty or do you think America is an eternally racist nation where all white people are gulity of original sin and must repent their entire lives? That's your choice. 

Now, Biden, granted, was IMO the least offensive member of his party that had a chance to win. The Dems could have done much worse. But he's only 80% there and slipping. He's potentially (I would argue likely) a Trojan horse for all these bad ideas and is likely too weak and too far gone to hold off the far left of his party. This part is at war with itself and all the energy and momentum in that party is on the far left which is why the Senate's top Democrat (Chuck Schumer) regularly makes joint speaking appearneces with a freshman Congresswoman who's way out of the mainstream but beloved on the fringe and is a Socialist rablerouser who promotes radicalism (AOC). As for Biden's VP selection, she's an ambitious, power hungry, two-face who lacks any guiding principles. She will potentially bubble wrap Biden and push him aside into the corner before his swearing in ceremony.  Biden can still string sentences together but is slipping upstairs, look at any of his speeches from the Senate/VP days and compare them to him now. He isn't going to be able to get it done for four years, he can barely function now.

Trump is an obnoxious jerk and yes he's divisive but so are his political enemies. With Trump you get (before the pandemic)  lowest unemployment in decades, great growth, not only no wars but Middle East peace. Trump is the stable one. Biden is maybe stable but you need him to be healthy and strong and he isn't and what's left of him, that position will wear him out, look at how fast Clinton, the Bushtard, and Obama went gray.

It's focking trump, man. It has to be Trump. 

[Hardcore troubadour 12,653]

A monarchy. This groundhog guy lives in a fantasy land. I’d like him to show me a monarch/authoritarian that gets impeached and has on going investigations by the opposition against him. Oh yeah, there is no opposition in a monarchy. This guy uses words wrong. I assume he’s a college grad.  

[RLLD 3,455]

A monarch is apparently anyone in power with an opposing ideology.

I don't know that the Republicans/Conservatives are "right" per se.....and I am not sure there is a silver bullet for any issue, a perfect solution without flaw.....its an inane dream.

But I do believe that Democrats think too short term, at best, and lack the long term vision needed to govern effectively.

[Hardcore troubadour 12,653]

I read Zinn and Chomskey too. Where’s my degree? 

[Utilit99 4,099]

So the US spoke up in 2016 and elected Trump. And this is how much the left respects the people and the process of this country. I thought 1 thing that was in common for all the US citizens was for the government to stop gumming up the works and get stuff done and stop whining to the people they are supposed to be working for. Why can't they just have a f*cking vote on it. That's why we elect people to represent them in the government.

 

On Tuesday’s broadcast of MSNBC’s “Rachel Maddow Show,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) vowed that Senate Democrats “will use every tool in the toolkit” to try to delay Republicans from filling Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s Supreme Court seat.

Schumer said, “We have tactical options to slow them down. We will use every tool in the toolkit. Now, admittedly, McConnell has changed things, changed the rules, so we have fewer tools and they’re less sharp, but every tool we have we will use. Today, we delayed committees going into effect. We had the right to do that and we did it. Tonight, we’re on the floor taking up all the time on the floor to talk about how bad this potential nominee — and there will be many other things that we can use. You’ll see them in the days ahead.”

[Voltaire 4,560]

18 minutes ago, Utilit99 said:

So the US spoke up in 2016 and elected Trump. And this is how much the left respects the people and the process of this country. I thought 1 thing that was in common for all the US citizens was for the government to stop gumming up the works and get stuff done and stop whining to the people they are supposed to be working for. Why can't they just have a f*cking vote on it. That's why we elect people to represent them in the government.

 

On Tuesday’s broadcast of MSNBC’s “Rachel Maddow Show,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) vowed that Senate Democrats “will use every tool in the toolkit” to try to delay Republicans from filling Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s Supreme Court seat.

Schumer said, “We have tactical options to slow them down. We will use every tool in the toolkit. Now, admittedly, McConnell has changed things, changed the rules, so we have fewer tools and they’re less sharp, but every tool we have we will use. Today, we delayed committees going into effect. We had the right to do that and we did it. Tonight, we’re on the floor taking up all the time on the floor to talk about how bad this potential nominee — and there will be many other things that we can use. You’ll see them in the days ahead.”

To be expected.

You know, watching all the twists and turns as Obamacare passed was, if nothing else, a great civics lesson on how the political process moves for those of us that paid attention at the time to every hurdle placed and removed. Now we're about to get a second lesson as we see the Senate procedural dance as McConnell and Schumer go to war over this, each employing every trick they know to slow down/stall/speed up the process.

Schoolhouse Rock did their best to explain it to us when we were kids but they only had sixty seconds to work with so they left some things out.

[RLLD 3,455]

25 minutes ago, Utilit99 said:

So the US spoke up in 2016 and elected Trump. And this is how much the left respects the people and the process of this country. I thought 1 thing that was in common for all the US citizens was for the government to stop gumming up the works and get stuff done and stop whining to the people they are supposed to be working for. Why can't they just have a f*cking vote on it. That's why we elect people to represent them in the government.

 

On Tuesday’s broadcast of MSNBC’s “Rachel Maddow Show,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) vowed that Senate Democrats “will use every tool in the toolkit” to try to delay Republicans from filling Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s Supreme Court seat.

Schumer said, “We have tactical options to slow them down. We will use every tool in the toolkit. Now, admittedly, McConnell has changed things, changed the rules, so we have fewer tools and they’re less sharp, but every tool we have we will use. Today, we delayed committees going into effect. We had the right to do that and we did it. Tonight, we’re on the floor taking up all the time on the floor to talk about how bad this potential nominee — and there will be many other things that we can use. You’ll see them in the days ahead.”

If there are constitutionally-based actions they are allowed to take then they should.   Seems fine to me.

[Utilit99 4,099]

1 minute ago, RLLD said:

If there are constitutionally-based actions they are allowed to take then they should.   Seems fine to me.

Yeah, this process has been in place forever in our constitution. And used many times before. Trump will throw out a name, and all the dems in the senate can feel free to vote for or against the person without being impeded by anyone.

If the dems don't like this part of the constitution, feel free to go through the process of trying to get it changed. But until it's actually changed, it should continue as-is. And it should be done quickly and efficiently so they can go do their jobs on the next topic at hand.