tuscl

29 times............

skibum609
Massachusetts
Wednesday, September 23, 2020 7:29 AM
in history an incumbent, just prior to an election has confronted the issue of nominating a Scotus Justice. 19 times the sitting President, with his party in control of the Senate, has proposed a nominee and 19 times they have been confirmed. 10 times the sitting President, with the Senate controlled by the opposition has submitted a nominee and 7 - 10 times they have failed to be confirmed, including Garland. The Democrats who claim that this is a unique situation and/or that nominating a justice at this point is illegitimate are simply liars banking on the fact that the people who vote for them are so stupid they will be believed, What is happening this year is normal. What happened to Garland is normal. The only thing abnormal is the litany of lies published by the fake news mainstream press.

23 comments

  • gammanu95
    •
    4 years ago
    In the dems defense, it is a unique situation. Those fools have nominated a surefire loser and career swamp monster two cycles in a row.
  • yahtzee74
    •
    4 years ago
    Can I have the source of that info so I can post this other places?
  • skibum609
    •
    4 years ago
    Its in the opinion section of the 09/22/2020 Miami Herald. Writer is Michael Ryan.
  • PutaTester
    •
    4 years ago
    So you are basing your opinion on the opinion of another fake opinion?
  • TheeOSU
    •
    4 years ago
    "What happened to Garland is normal. The only thing abnormal is the litany of lies published by the fake news mainstream press." So what else is new?
  • Richard_Head
    •
    4 years ago
    This is what makes it unique: “The American people should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice. Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new president.” --Mitch McConnell, February 2016
  • ime
    •
    4 years ago
    Chuck Schumer Tweeted on 2/22/16 Attn GOP: Senate has confirmed 17 #SCOTUS justices presidential election years. #DoYourJob
  • WavvyCain
    •
    4 years ago
    Skibum confirmed autistic
  • rossl
    •
    4 years ago
    SB is on the mark with this. The OTHER factor in 2016 is that, thankfully, it was BHO's second term. It was guaranteed a new president was going to succeed him.
  • skibum609
    •
    4 years ago
    The 29 figure is a simple historical fact, not my opinion. Jesus Christ wtf is wrong with people. It was an OPINION piece in the Miami Herald that cited FACTS a normal person could and would look up. Really something wrong with people who are liberal/progressives.
  • Papi_Chulo
    •
    4 years ago
    For the Libs, facts and the law have no meaning or place in their utopia
  • winex
    •
    4 years ago
    This is really an artifact of our culture today. Schools are eliminating grades to "preserve self esteem" instead of teaching kids that working hard towards a goal has benefits. Athletic competitions are giving trophys to everyone, devaluing the effort of the losers. Even in corporate America, how many managers have thanked "everyone" for doing a good job when the fact is that not all people put in equal effort or contribute equally. It's only natural that facts can be treated as opinion. In the words of Homer Simpson "Facts are meaningless. You can use facts to prove anything that is even remotely true." [view link]
  • Richard_Head
    •
    4 years ago
    The echo is really loud in this thread.
  • Papi_Chulo
    •
    4 years ago
    ^ no - that's just your brain-damage
  • TheeOSU
    •
    4 years ago
    ^ Lol
  • TheeOSU
    •
    4 years ago
    Dick heads don't have brains!
  • PutaTester
    •
    4 years ago
    Papi_Chulo, despite our differences in opinion, I used to have respect for you. No more since you have fallen into name calling. Same for anyone else. I have liberal leanings, but the conservatives have made some good points. I try hard to look at all the FACTS in an issue and decide accordingly. Trolling, name calling, and the like indicate that you have no respect for those that disagree and that you have lost the point, because you cannot provide a valid counter. If you cannot play nice, get off the playground.
  • Hank Moody
    •
    4 years ago
    How many times of the 7-10 nominations that were not confirmed WAS THE NOMINATION NOT BROUGHT TO A VOTE? I don’t know the answer but that seems to be the difference. Note: I read the Herald opinion piece. The writer did not use his own numbers, but referred to numbers offer by the Kansas attorney general. The numbers might be correct, but that’s an odd way to cite numbers if they are otherwise publicly available. Note 2: The article also says “in the 10 instances where the parties were different, the nominee “sailed through” only 3 times.” Odd choice of words and again, it doesn’t say how many of the nominations were brought to a vote or how many were confirmed. We know one wasn’t, Garland. At this point in the piece, the author talks about whether it was “fair” to deny Garland a hearing. He abandons all of his “stats” leading me to believe the numbers aren’t good for the case he is making. Conclusion: the offense occurred in 2016 when McConnell denied Garland a hearing. Many republicans declared they were making a precedent that they would live with if an opening occurred in 2020. By replacing Ginsburg on the rush, they are deviating from the precedent they set in 2016, not history before that.
  • skibum609
    •
    4 years ago
    There was no precedent set by the Republicans in 2016. They had the Constitutional right to deny a hearing and they did so. They have the Constitutional right to hold a hearing now and will do so. I do agree that Garland was the first to not get a hearing and won't be the last, but once the murderer, Ted Kennedy, made the Bork nomination political the end was in sight. All we are seeing now is the past happening again in that every empire in history has failed and crashed when they no longer adhered to the tenets and beliefs that made them great. With America it was the rule of law. That is gone. This is the result. Anyone watching the "protester" going after older white people dining out can see this. Always order a steak if you are dining outside in a blue city - it comes with a weapon.
  • RandomMember
    •
    4 years ago
    From @Richard's post: “The American people should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice. Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new president.” --Mitch McConnell, February 2016 _______________________ Translation, and this is not a troll: "I don't want Barack Obama to select the next SC justice. If I allow the vote on the Senate floor, there may be some defections from some of the GOP Senators. I have the power to prevent Garland from being considered; therefore I intend to do just that."
  • TheeOSU
    •
    4 years ago
    ^ Translation, I snuck into America after years of sucking dirty old men cocks after they ass fucked me in the back alleys of Calcutta so my thanks to America is to hate it for not giving me a green card and forcing me to continue sucking dirty old men cocks after they ass fucked me in the back alleys of Denver.
  • skibum609
    •
    4 years ago
    Simple fact is that denying Garland a vote was Constitutional and something the Democrats would have done themselves. Nominating new Scotus Judge right now is also Constitutional and something the Democrats would have done. Too bad, so sad. If you like your health care plan, you can keep it. - Some liar famous due to reasons other than competence. Politicians lie. Big fucking deal. Mueller report could have ended this but the democrats sowed and now they reap.
  • gammanu95
    •
    4 years ago
    The Mueller report could not have ended it because there was nothing to report. It was based on utter falsehood, and a treasonous waste of taxpayers money. Everyone involved in perpetuating it should tried for treason, which is still a capital crime!
You must be a member to leave a comment.Join Now
Got something to say?
Start your own discussion