Author Topic: Delicious schadenfreud... Left weeping over "stolen" Supreme Court seat... (Read 2226 times)

K Frame · « **on:** February 03, 2017, 06:49:29 AM »

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-myth-of-the-stolen-supreme-court-seat-1485995357

Excellent WSJ (that's Wall Street Journal, NOT warrior, social justice) op-ed just savaging the Democrats and their whining about a "stolen Supreme Court seat."

The article just CRUSHES them because it points out that they, not the Republicans, were the first to propose the "no court appointments in the last year of a president's term," only they never got to exercise it, and now they're butt hurt that the Republicans dared to steal their idea.

"“We should not confirm any Bush nominee to the Supreme Court, except in extraordinary circumstances,” Weepy Chucky Schumer declared in a July 2007 speech to the American Constitution Society.

While I hate the precedent it would set, I REALLY hope that the Dems try to filibuster and the Republicans drop the nuclear option on them, mainly because it would be a TRUE Conan the Barbarian moment...

We would hear the lamentations of their women as they are shut out of the process by their own methods and processes.

Perd Hapley · « **Reply #1 on:** February 03, 2017, 08:36:53 AM »

The Democrats would never admit this, but it was actually Barack Obama that left the seat empty. The appointments clause makes clear who is responsible for appointing justices:

Quote

He [POTUS] shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for...

According to the supreme law of the land, he was supposed to appoint someone "with the advise and consent of the Senate." Did he ask the Senate's advice on whom to select? I don't know, but he obviously didn't take any such advice, if it were offered. He could have filled the seat at any time, had he chosen someone like Gorsuch.

K Frame · « **Reply #2 on:** February 03, 2017, 08:41:21 AM »

How DARE you come to me with that radical, moldy, dead white man written piece of claptrap called the Constitution!

NOT MY PRESIDENT! NOT MY CONSTITUTION!

Ben · « **Reply #3 on:** February 03, 2017, 09:15:21 AM »

I think Biden said the same thing even years earlier than Schumer. Funny how things change when the roles are reversed. Funnier how 90% of the MSM have no memory.

MechAg94 · « **Reply #4 on:** February 03, 2017, 10:19:36 AM »

Liberals are always hypocritical about being hypocrites.

Hawkmoon · « **Reply #5 on:** February 03, 2017, 10:28:17 AM »

Quote from: Mike Irwin on February 03, 2017, 06:49:29 AM

While I hate the precedent it would set, I REALLY hope that the Dems try to filibuster and the Republicans drop the nuclear option on them, mainly because it would be a TRUE Conan the Barbarian moment...

I don't hate the "nuclear option" at all. IMHO the filibuster has no place in statesmanship. The members of Congress are supposed to be adults, participating in the governing of the country through the parliamentary process. The basis of that should be (but isn't) that anything to come before the House or the Senate should be discussed on/for its merits, and then voted on. Gamesmanship such as poison pill amendments filibusters, and all such gimmicks have no place in a mature, civilized legislative body. Anything to come before either house should be discussed on its merits, and voted on based on its merits.

Perd Hapley · « **Reply #6 on:** February 03, 2017, 10:33:50 AM »

Quote from: Ben on February 03, 2017, 09:15:21 AM

Funny how things change when the roles are reversed. Funnier how 90% of the MSM have no memory.

Oh, I think plenty of them remember. They'll probably even mention these facts on page 3 of their stories. They just count on us having short memories, and not reading past the headline, or the lede.

Another convenient half-truth the Left likes to indulge goes like this: The people elected Barack Obama in 2012; he was the president. Therefore, the seat was his to fill.

Of course, that leaves out those painful facts about the people choosing in 2010, 2012, and 2014 to send a House and then a Senate delegation of the opposing party, presumably to oppose Mr. Obama. The voters obviously were quite alright with the Senate "stealing" that seat on the court, as they returned a Republican majority to the Senate in 2016, and replaced Mr. Obama with a Republican president.

But by all means, Democrats, go ahead and interpret those election results as a mandate to put a Democratic judge on the high court. It makes as much sense as the rest of your notions.

K Frame · « **Reply #7 on:** February 03, 2017, 10:51:43 AM »

"members of Congress are supposed to be adults"

BBBBBBBBBBBBBBWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

HankB · « **Reply #8 on:** February 03, 2017, 10:56:04 AM »

Quote from: Hawkmoon on February 03, 2017, 10:28:17 AM

I don't hate the "nuclear option" at all. IMHO the filibuster has no place in statesmanship. . .

The filibuster doesn't seem to be what it used to be - one man, standing and talking nonstop as long as he could, with the filibuster ending when he stopped talking.

Now, it seems like it's not much more than someone saying "I'm filibustering" whereupon whoever's leading the session says "OK" and they move on to something else.

MechAg94 · « **Reply #9 on:** February 03, 2017, 11:05:50 AM »

Quote from: HankB on February 03, 2017, 10:56:04 AM

The filibuster doesn't seem to be what it used to be - one man, standing and talking nonstop as long as he could, with the filibuster ending when he stopped talking.

Now, it seems like it's not much more than someone saying "I'm filibustering" whereupon whoever's leading the session says "OK" and they move on to something else.

My understanding is that a group of Senators could also filibuster and keep take turns talking. Either way, they aren't likely create such a circus all the time or for every little thing. If they do, all that means if they piss off every other Senator and their own party leadership.

K Frame · « **Reply #10 on:** February 03, 2017, 01:27:55 PM »

Charles Krauthamer has a very good op-ed on in the Washington Post on this subject, laying the entire blame for what's facing the Democrats exactly where it should be -- at Harry Reid's arrogant feet.

I think the Republicans should erect a statue and vote a resolution of thanks to him.

Perd Hapley · « **Reply #11 on:** February 03, 2017, 01:51:30 PM »

Quote from: Mike Irwin on February 03, 2017, 01:27:55 PM

Charles Krauthamer has a very good op-ed on in the Washington Post on this subject, laying the entire blame for what's facing the Democrats exactly where it should be -- at Harry Reid's arrogant feet.

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/krauthammer020217.php3

Scout26 · « **Reply #12 on:** February 03, 2017, 04:14:05 PM »

Dear Obama, Schumer, Reid, et al;

Greetings, The United States Senate withholds its advice and does not give our consent to your nominee, Garland Whatshisface.

Sincerely,

The United States Senate (Majority Leader)

grampster · « **Reply #13 on:** February 03, 2017, 07:31:27 PM »

The irony is that nearly everything the democrats are whining about are things that they put into place to stymie the republicans and they are now getting a little karmic payback. It is amusing.

K Frame · « **Reply #14 on:** February 04, 2017, 07:46:12 AM »

Quote from: grampster on February 03, 2017, 07:31:27 PM

The irony is that nearly everything the democrats are whining about are things that they put into place to stymie the republicans and they are now getting a little karmic payback. It is amusing.

Exactly, Gramsp, that's what makes this so effing wonderful.

My congressman, Gerry Connolly, has gone full barking moonbat crybaby the last couple of months, and he's really ratcheted up his crap with the appointment of Gorsuch, actually posting on facebook that the judge would be a "reactionary force on the court and out of step with the American will."

I'm not sure if he's unaware of what happened in the last election or not, but the American will seemed to be just a bit different from what he's thinking it is.

Perd Hapley · « **Reply #15 on:** February 04, 2017, 07:51:47 AM »

Quote from: Mike Irwin on February 04, 2017, 07:46:12 AM

I'm not sure if he's unaware of what happened in the last election or not, but the American will seemed to be just a bit different from what he's thinking it is.

No, see, that American will can be completely ignored, because Hillary "won," and the Russians tricked us. #resist!

HankB · « **Reply #16 on:** February 04, 2017, 09:07:06 AM »

Quote from: Mike Irwin on February 03, 2017, 01:27:55 PM

. . . I think the Republicans should erect a statue and vote a resolution of thanks to him.

I like that idea - especially if the statue included a plaque on its base detailing Reid's "contributions"

With the right wording on the commemorative plaque, the reaction of Schumer et.al. would be priceless!

Perd Hapley · « **Reply #17 on:** February 05, 2017, 07:08:51 PM »

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/debbie-wasserman-schultz-trump-dictator-234428

“Because it shows that he believes that he was elected as a dictator,” Wasserman Schultz said. “There is an advise and consent role for the United States Senate, and that is what they are doing. He doesn’t just get to have his nominations rubber-stamped.”

Hmmm. I wonder if she thought Barack Obama should just get whichever commie justices he wanted.

Scout26 · « **Reply #18 on:** February 05, 2017, 11:21:23 PM »

I forgot to add the P.S. to the above letter the Senate to Obama.

Quote

P.S. Because *expletive deleted*ck You, that's why.

Northwoods · « **Reply #19 on:** February 06, 2017, 12:44:47 AM »

You know Dave, you really shouldn't be so cryptic. Tell how you really feel.

K Frame · « **Reply #20 on:** February 06, 2017, 06:24:54 AM »

"There is an advise and consent role for the United States Senate, and that is what they are doing."

That's cute. The Dems aren't advising and consenting, not when they try to take their balls and go home and keep nominations from proceeding.

OOPS! Nuclear option! Don't mean crap it you check out entirely! WAAAAH! WAAAAAH!

I think in the future I'm going to stop calling it the nuclear option and call it the HRM...

The Harry Reid Maneuver.

Gotta keep reminding everyone on the left who simpers that it was Harry to came up with this crap, so yes, the right DOES get to play with your toys once you no longer can.

MechAg94 · « **Reply #21 on:** February 06, 2017, 10:10:20 AM »

The Dems said they would block the Trump SC nominee before they even knew who it was. That isn't giving "advice and consent".

News:

Author Topic: Delicious schadenfreud... Left weeping over "stolen" Supreme Court seat... (Read 2226 times)