Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 30, 2019 15:39:12 GMT
|
|
|
Post by IceTruckDexter on May 30, 2019 23:36:12 GMT
What a dumb point. It's his job to help fill the seat.
|
|
|
Post by quetee on May 30, 2019 23:43:14 GMT
What a dumb point. It's his job to help fill the seat. he didnt do that last time so...
|
|
|
Post by IceTruckDexter on May 31, 2019 0:29:20 GMT
What a dumb point. It's his job to help fill the seat. he didnt do that last time so... What do you mean? He helped put two Justices during the Trump administration.
|
|
|
Post by stephen on May 31, 2019 0:32:13 GMT
he didnt do that last time so... What do you mean? He helped put two Justices during the Trump administration. He specifically made it his mandate not to pursue any Supreme Court appointments made by Obama, despite the fact that it was within his purview to appoint Merrick Garland in the final year of his administration, even though Garland was a centrist well-regarded for his qualifications on either side of the aisle. It was because it was under Obama's administration that he was rebuffed.
|
|
|
Post by IceTruckDexter on May 31, 2019 0:41:36 GMT
What do you mean? He helped put two Justices during the Trump administration. He specifically made it his mandate not to pursue any Supreme Court appointments made by Obama, despite the fact that it was within his purview to appoint Merrick Garland in the final year of his administration, even though Garland was a centrist well-regarded for his qualifications on either side of the aisle. It was because it was under Obama's administration that he was rebuffed. Or he and the Republicans didn't agree with his rulings just as the Democrats don't agree with Kavanaugh and what's his face rulings.
|
|
|
Post by quetee on May 31, 2019 0:58:26 GMT
He specifically made it his mandate not to pursue any Supreme Court appointments made by Obama, despite the fact that it was within his purview to appoint Merrick Garland in the final year of his administration, even though Garland was a centrist well-regarded for his qualifications on either side of the aisle. It was because it was under Obama's administration that he was rebuffed. Or he and the Republicans didn't agree with his rulings just as the Democrats don't agree with Kavanaugh and what's his face rulings. that is not what happened. Mitch said no cause Obama selected him. End of story.
|
|
|
Post by IceTruckDexter on May 31, 2019 1:01:17 GMT
Or he and the Republicans didn't agree with his rulings just as the Democrats don't agree with Kavanaugh and what's his face rulings. that is not what happened. Mitch said no cause Obama selected him. End of story. And the Democrats made an absolute bollocking of the whole Kavanaugh thing simply because he's a Trump appointee. Don't pretend the other side don't do it. They have their party lines and they stick to it.
|
|
|
Post by countjohn on May 31, 2019 1:02:55 GMT
He specifically made it his mandate not to pursue any Supreme Court appointments made by Obama, despite the fact that it was within his purview to appoint Merrick Garland in the final year of his administration, even though Garland was a centrist well-regarded for his qualifications on either side of the aisle. It was because it was under Obama's administration that he was rebuffed. Or he and the Republicans didn't agree with his rulings just as the Democrats don't agree with Kavanaugh and what's his face rulings. Democrats didn't want Kavanaugh on the court so they voted against his confirmation. McConnell outright said he wouldn't even hold hearings or a vote on anyone Obama nominated, and wouldn't even say if he would confirm a nominee if Clinton won, so theoretically we could have just gone along indefinitely with 8 justices.
|
|
|
Post by IceTruckDexter on May 31, 2019 1:30:29 GMT
Or he and the Republicans didn't agree with his rulings just as the Democrats don't agree with Kavanaugh and what's his face rulings. Democrats didn't want Kavanaugh on the court so they voted against his confirmation. McConnell outright said he wouldn't even hold hearings or a vote on anyone Obama nominated, and wouldn't even say if he would confirm a nominee if Clinton won, so theoretically we could have just gone along indefinitely with 8 justices. Yes and if the Democrats held the Senate then they'd do the same thing.
|
|
|
Post by quetee on May 31, 2019 2:18:03 GMT
Democrats didn't want Kavanaugh on the court so they voted against his confirmation. McConnell outright said he wouldn't even hold hearings or a vote on anyone Obama nominated, and wouldn't even say if he would confirm a nominee if Clinton won, so theoretically we could have just gone along indefinitely with 8 justices. Yes and if the Democrats held the Senate then they'd do the same thing. The dems did not do that to Regan. Mitch hated Obama and it was not cause he was a dem.
|
|
|
Post by IceTruckDexter on May 31, 2019 2:37:06 GMT
Yes and if the Democrats held the Senate then they'd do the same thing. The dems did not do that to Regan. Mitch hated Obama and it was not cause he was a dem. That was the 80's and he was fighting Soviet communism. If they fought him too hard it would be easy to label them communists.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 31, 2019 12:26:37 GMT
I am so sick of this "both sides are equally bad" refrain. No. Only one side actively lies and maneuvers themselves around normal procedures to get what they want. Democrats are no saints, but the platforms that they campaign on are by and large what they work towards when elected. When Republicans campaign by telling middle- and working-class people that their policies will actually benefit them, they are lying. During the 2016 election and afterward, only one side has encouraged violence and division and fear.
|
|
|
Post by quetee on May 31, 2019 15:24:30 GMT
The dems did not do that to Regan. Mitch hated Obama and it was not cause he was a dem. That was the 80's and he was fighting Soviet communism. If they fought him too hard it would be easy to label them communists. Not sure what that has to do with anything. The point remains that dems controlled the Senate and when Reagan appointed a justice, they confirmed. Mitch was simply not having it cause he did not like Obama. There was still approx 10 months left in his term so....
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on May 31, 2019 15:28:36 GMT
I'll say this for McConnell and it's not really for McConnell but well, last night I watched Jimmy Kimmel - he used to be a comedian, right, because he is now host of a free hour long commercial for the Democratic party and Nancy Pelosi was his guest.
On that show Pelosi was very much like Trump and McConnell herself imo for rhetoric which lowers the standard of her office too..........very much played a gross political shell game last night (while Kimmel played dumb and abetted her points) with impeachment and all of it to rapturous applause from her base which wouldn't be watching Kimmel otherwise right?
That's how low the discussion standard has gone.....both sides might not be equivalently bad overall but at key points in the political discourse at least McConnell is a bit more honest about the optics of what he's doing........
|
|
|
Post by quetee on May 31, 2019 15:44:16 GMT
I'll say this for McConnell and it's not really for McConnell but well, last night I watched Jimmy Kimmel - he used to be a comedian, right, because he is now host of a free hour long commercial for the Democratic party and Nancy Pelosi was his guest. On that show Pelosi was very much like Trump and McConnell herself imo for rhetoric which lowers the standard of her office too..........very much played a gross political shell game last night (while Kimmel played dumb and abetted her points) with impeachment and all of it to rapturous applause from her base which wouldn't be watching Kimmel otherwise right? That's how low the discussion standard has gone.....both sides might not be equivalently bad overall but at key points in the political discourse at least McConnell is a bit more honest about the optics of what he's doing........ If Mitch comes out and states he doesn't like black people then I would say he was being honest.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 31, 2019 15:52:10 GMT
That's how low the discussion standard has gone.....both sides might not be equivalently bad overall but at key points in the political discourse at least McConnell is a bit more honest about the optics of what he's doing........ It's good vs. evil as far as I'm concerned...
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on May 31, 2019 15:53:47 GMT
I'll say this for McConnell and it's not really for McConnell but well, last night I watched Jimmy Kimmel - he used to be a comedian, right, because he is now host of a free hour long commercial for the Democratic party and Nancy Pelosi was his guest. On that show Pelosi was very much like Trump and McConnell herself imo for rhetoric which lowers the standard of her office too..........very much played a gross political shell game last night (while Kimmel played dumb and abetted her points) with impeachment and all of it to rapturous applause from her base which wouldn't be watching Kimmel otherwise right? That's how low the discussion standard has gone.....both sides might not be equivalently bad overall but at key points in the political discourse at least McConnell is a bit more honest about the optics of what he's doing........ If Mitch comes out and states he doesn't like black people then I would say he was being honest. Good point...........though then you'd have to get into that whole issue of how the Democratic party basically counts on black people staying unquestioning at all and takes their voting overwhelmingly Democrat as a cynical given. Plenty of dishonesty to go around across both parties sadly........
|
|
|
Post by IceTruckDexter on May 31, 2019 19:32:42 GMT
That's how low the discussion standard has gone.....both sides might not be equivalently bad overall but at key points in the political discourse at least McConnell is a bit more honest about the optics of what he's doing........ It's good vs. evil as far as I'm concerned... And you think the Democrats are the good guys.
|
|
|
Post by IceTruckDexter on May 31, 2019 19:37:22 GMT
I am so sick of this "both sides are equally bad" refrain. No. Only one side actively lies and maneuvers themselves around normal procedures to get what they want. Democrats are no saints, but the platforms that they campaign on are by and large what they work towards when elected. When Republicans campaign by telling middle- and working-class people that their policies will actually benefit them, they are lying. During the 2016 election and afterward, only one side has encouraged violence and division and fear. You're a lying sack of shit. The Democrats have these big platforms because entertainment culture leans left which gives them an advantage and it forces the Republicans to go after different targets. You saying they're lying is because you have a left wing point of view and automatically view the other side in bad faith. You don't see the Republicans accusing the other side of nefarious intentions. As for violence in 2016 it was completely coming from the Left.
|
|
dazed
Based
Posts: 2,584
Likes: 1,757
|
Post by dazed on Jun 1, 2019 0:28:14 GMT
Not a surprise.
|
|