Notorious R.B.G. dead at 87 - Replace her before January 17th, 2021?
- Thread starter Jkloc420
- Start date
The Republicans were perfectly happy for SCOTUS to begin it's term following Scalia's death with an 8 person bench. If it was perfectly ok then...what's wrong with it now?
As leader of the Senate McConnell went on the Senate floor and refused to give Garland a hearing stating the American people deserved to have a say in who their SCOTUS judges will be. What's different this time? Are Republicans the ONLY Americans?
In addition Graham in Senate committee plainly stated that there should be no SCOTUS appointments in a presidential election year . Isn't this current vacancy what he was talking about?
So they've got two choices? Either stand on the principles and precedents they themselves created and postpone the nomination and confirmation until after the election and if they are confident that Trump and the Senate GOP majority will be retained this should be no problem and will serve to cement their political legacy's aided at least in part by the example of fair political play they would have set.
The opportunity to set themselves apart, to hold themselves to a higher standard, a standard they are constantly accusing the Dems of not holding themselves to stands right there before them.
The other is to stand guilty of their own hypocrisy , have to eat their own words, make complete fools of themselves and quickly push through another nomination. Why would anyone want do this if the election is in the bag for them?
Could their actions be driven by growing doubts about their chances for retention?
DriveInDriveOut
Inordinately Right
Tldr.
President Trump is going to nominate a conservative. Republican senators are going to confirm. You are going to drown in your own tears.
Carry on.
And if there is a Democrat president and a Democrat congress in January should they not in your opinion retaliate against the GOP in every way possible?
DriveInDriveOut
Inordinately Right
They have for four years and they will continue to no matter what.
Anyone who doesn't think Democrats would be trying to fill this seat if the situation was reversed, is completely delusional.
oldngray
nowhere special
Dems are making threats about things they will do anyway.
MisplacedRailWorker
an absolute *ing disgrace of a human being.
I wish you left it up I come to BrownCafe for the roasting and ass reaming <3
MisplacedRailWorker
an absolute *ing disgrace of a human being.
I am so happy to see that this thread is heating up again. Let me grab my Bud Light seltzers and I promise to give some insight for hours on end
Winnah, winnah, chicken dinnah.
REALLY, is there anyone who thinks Democrats wouldn't do the same thing?
Yup, they are making terrorist threats. Disgusting how they have been destroying the country with their phony demonstrations that all devolve into arson, destruction, bodily harm, even murder.
oldngray
nowhere special
You can just announce you will have an event for conservatives and they will be sure to show up to cause trouble. If you trick them and don't really have anything planned they will attack reporters or each other. Sad but funny.
Only in Democrat controlled cities where Democrat mayors allow the violence and destruction caused by their Democrat voters.
Disgusting. Police need to be let loose to go in and crack skulls.
Old Man Jingles
Rat out of a cage
They will regardless ... that's what they do!
Uh huh.
This was part of your previous post:
The fact that you felt the need to say that speaks volumes.
He should stick to his word.
I think the SCOTUS should get a new member before the election, given that the Republicans hold both the WH and the senate.
But he should not vote for it. He made his position very clear.
Boy did you read that wrong. I didn't say that out of thin air. Another poster was saying pretty much that men can do everything better than women, they shouldn't be able to do anything if there is a qualified man available. I pointed out that women can be wise and intellectual too. How you're reading that I'm bashing women is surprising to me.
If that is truly the case, I apologize.
It sounded highly begrudging in its acknowledgement that women would be qualified for the Supreme Court.
You suggested we needed a conservative this time around, and then had to specifically point out that the women on the court were all liberal.
I don't disagree that they are, but it seemed very much like a veiled shot at women serving as judges.
Jkloc420
Do you need an air compressor or tire gauge
Fill that seat
Not at all. The fact is since Sandra Day O'Connor retired we haven't had a conservative woman on the court. Trump has said he will nominate a woman this week and the top candidate is said to be a brilliant conservative. I'm looking forward to seeing her confirmed. The current ladies on the court are liberal. And were nominated by a liberal president. No surprise there. I also said as more than half of all voters are women it's only right that they should be represented on the court too. If I were against them being on the court I would never say that.
