Nominee dies waiting for a vote,Republican Senator wanted to "inflict pain" on Obama.

[Mursilis]

Your comment served as a point of diversion that was promptly seized upon- "they're just as bad".

If that was not your intention it certainly was the result.

So all comments attempting to provide additional facts and clarity to sometimes complex situations are just "diversions" - got it. It's just "Dems good/GOP bad!" all the time.

 

[werepossum]

The problem with putting the nomination to a vote is that you run the risk of having the race/gender card played. As Jhhhnnn will surely remind us, the GOP hates both women and minorities, so why risk giving the other side more ammo? The nominee I cited was qualified to serve in the position - she had advanced degrees, experience in the field, etc. She just wasn't a veteran, which was a violation of an unwritten rule, not an actual one.

Oh, certainly. But not bringing up the nomination for a vote also gives the Dems ammo. Sometimes we don't get a good choice and a bad choice, we get two bad choices, and given two bad choices, I much prefer they do their jobs and make their best case.

 

[Jhhnn]

That's really all you see here? It figures.

And now... dancing away, I see.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

It's just "Dems good/GOP bad!" all the time.

You got it.

 

[FerrelGeek]

So all comments attempting to provide additional facts and clarity to sometimes complex situations are just "diversions" - got it. It's just "Dems good/GOP bad!" all the time.

Johnnycake is a one note symphony in b*tch major. The reps could vote tomorrow to give full reparations for slavery, free gender reassignment healthcare, full citizenship to all illegals, guaranteed minimum income (including healthcare), forgiveness of all student loans, free college education, banning concealed carry and any non single-shot firearm, imprisoning anyone who speaks out against climate change, confiscating 99.99% of the income from the top 1% and redistributing it, then disbanding themselves (making the GOP illegal), and he's still find a reason to hate them.

And for the record, I have no use for either party.

 

[Jhhnn]

So all comments attempting to provide additional facts and clarity to sometimes complex situations are just "diversions" - got it. It's just "Dems good/GOP bad!" all the time.

A single counter example in no way justifies Repub obstructionism wrt routine confirmations. Drag in all the supposed "nuance" you want- their conduct has been reprehensible & the Butts nomination is an extreme example of it.

 

[Jhhnn]

Johnnycake is a one note symphony in b*tch major. The reps could vote tomorrow to give full reparations for slavery, free gender reassignment healthcare, full citizenship to all illegals, guaranteed minimum income (including healthcare), forgiveness of all student loans, free college education, banning concealed carry and any non single-shot firearm, imprisoning anyone who speaks out against climate change, confiscating 99.99% of the income from the top 1% and redistributing it, then disbanding themselves (making the GOP illegal), and he's still find a reason to hate them.

And for the record, I have no use for either party.

Desperate denial.

 

[FerrelGeek]

Desperate denial.

Not at all. Just calling you out for what you are. And I said that I have no use for either party, so I'm being fair, unlike you.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

And now... dancing away, I see.

Dancing away? OK, then let me be a little less "nuanced" and a little more direct. You're an idiot, plain and simple...and too fn stupid to know it. You're a pathetic hack and a complete moron who's completely oblivious to facts when presented. The NYT (which btw is rapidly becoming a joke) dishonestly framed this particular issue (by deliberate omission or incompetence) and you bought in hook, line and sinker. You're so steeped in political ideology and polarized stereotypes that you are no longer capable of anything resembling objective reasoning when additional information is provided. The Butt's nomination was fubar on many levels, and there's plenty of blame to go around. This is much more complex than one Republican being pissed off at Obama with an axe to grind. But that's all you see...that's all you're capable of seeing because your head is so screwed up. Wake up...just wake the fuck up.

 

[Jhhnn]

Not at all. Just calling you out for what you are. And I said that I have no use for either party, so I'm being fair, unlike you.

Pure bullshit. You can either condemn or applaud Repub obstructionism. Take your pick.

 

[Jhhnn]

Dancing away? OK, then let me be a little less "nuanced" and a little more direct. You're an idiot, plain and simple...and too fn stupid to know it. You're a pathetic hack and a complete moron who's completely oblivious to facts when presented. The NYT (which btw is rapidly becoming a joke) dishonestly framed this particular issue (by deliberate omission or incompetence) and you bought in hook, line and sinker. You're so steeped in political ideology and polarized stereotypes that you are no longer capable of anything resembling objective reasoning when additional information is provided. The Butt's nomination was fubar on many levels, and there's plenty of blame to go around. This is much more complex than one Republican being pissed off at Obama with an axe to grind. But that's all you see...that's all you're capable of seeing because your head is so screwed up. Wake up...just wake the fuck up.

You're not being direct at all, other than in resorting to personal attack.

If the Butts nomination is more complex & fubared as you describe then you can surely provide documentation to back up that claim. Go for it.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

You're not being direct at all, other than in resorting to personal attack.

If the Butts nomination is more complex & fubared as you describe then you can surely provide documentation to back up that claim. Go for it.

Unbelievable! See Post #56 you fn moron.

 

[Jaskalas]

Democrats had started to use the Senate's 60 vote rule as a requirement to shutdown everything in Bush's second term. Republicans simply escalated from there. Democrats will do the same thing if/when the tables are flipped.

Is the general public's instant communications with opposing views responsible for increasing divisiveness and hardened bitterness? One look at this forum and one wonders if us stupid apes weren't ready for the technological gifts we enjoy today. Our use of the internet has some serious growing pains to face up to, and I do wonder if that hasn't spilled over to our elected leaders as well.

Government would work better if elections had more decisive results. With governing bodies more able to govern and effect change. If the people could seemingly get what they want after winning an election. I look at the UK choosing parties and start to wonder...

Our system has apparent problems.

 

[swamplizard]

Perhaps the American people are tired of a broken 2 party system. Now is the time for a true Progressive Party to emerge and begin taking seats in Congress with their eyes on the 2020 election cycle. I think this election, the stakes are too high to risk a viable 3rd party candidate. But with proper funding and an active grassroots campaigning, I could see a 3rd party taking the WH in 2020.

 

[Mursilis]

A single counter example in no way justifies Repub obstructionism wrt routine confirmations. Drag in all the supposed "nuance" you want- their conduct has been reprehensible & the Butts nomination is an extreme example of it.

Again, when did I try to justify GOP policy generally? You're just seeing shadows here.

 

[Jhhnn]

Unbelievable! See Post #56 you fn moron.

Post #56 quotes me & a reliable source illustrating Repub obstructionism wrt dozens of nominees, then goes on to describe a single undocumented counter example.

Which makes the situation only as complex as it needs to be for you to justify obfuscation.

 

[werepossum]

Dancing away? OK, then let me be a little less "nuanced" and a little more direct. You're an idiot, plain and simple...and too fn stupid to know it. You're a pathetic hack and a complete moron who's completely oblivious to facts when presented. The NYT (which btw is rapidly becoming a joke) dishonestly framed this particular issue (by deliberate omission or incompetence) and you bought in hook, line and sinker. You're so steeped in political ideology and polarized stereotypes that you are no longer capable of anything resembling objective reasoning when additional information is provided. The Butt's nomination was fubar on many levels, and there's plenty of blame to go around. This is much more complex than one Republican being pissed off at Obama with an axe to grind. But that's all you see...that's all you're capable of seeing because your head is so screwed up. Wake up...just wake the fuck up.

You're being too harsh. I'm pretty sure Jhhnn is merely a bot that parses each post looking for buzz words, consults a look-up table for Democrat talking points, then regurgitates those talking points. Being a pathetic hack and a complete moron are way beyond his programming.

Democrats had started to use the Senate's 60 vote rule as a requirement to shutdown everything in Bush's second term. Republicans simply escalated from there. Democrats will do the same thing if/when the tables are flipped.

Is the general public's instant communications with opposing views responsible for increasing divisiveness and hardened bitterness? One look at this forum and one wonders if us stupid apes weren't ready for the technological gifts we enjoy today. Our use of the internet has some serious growing pains to face up to, and I do wonder if that hasn't spilled over to our elected leaders as well.

Government would work better if elections had more decisive results. With governing bodies more able to govern and effect change. If the people could seemingly get what they want after winning an election. I look at the UK choosing parties and start to wonder...

Our system has apparent problems.

I would agree except that it's more the American people rejecting the greater evil each cycle than voting for what we want.

Perhaps the American people are tired of a broken 2 party system. Now is the time for a true Progressive Party to emerge and begin taking seats in Congress with their eyes on the 2020 election cycle. I think this election, the stakes are too high to risk a viable 3rd party candidate. But with proper funding and an active grassroots campaigning, I could see a 3rd party taking the WH in 2020.

What do you imagine would be more progressive than Hillary (ignoring for a moment her rampant dishonesty, corruption and authoritarianism) or Bernie yet still be acceptable to a majority of the American people? The Greens have been available for a couple decades with their plan to openly seize and redistribute wealth, yet have garnered very little support.

 

[Jhhnn]

Democrats had started to use the Senate's 60 vote rule as a requirement to shutdown everything in Bush's second term. Republicans simply escalated from there. Democrats will do the same thing if/when the tables are flipped.

Mere assertion of convenience utterly lacking in documentation.

 

[interchange]

It seems that this was initially posed as a partisan problem.
Then it was pointed out that the pot was calling the kettle black.
Then it was pointed out that there is a false equivalency, that the kettle is in fact more black than the pot.

I am concerned that it doesn't matter which is more black. That is plain to see. I am interested in how we might consider throwing some acetone on the pot and kettle instead of more black paint.

Let's try this:
This personal obstructionist action was bad, and we have a duty to inform the actors involved that we do not support it.

 

[Jhhnn]

You're being too harsh. I'm pretty sure Jhhnn is merely a bot that parses each post looking for buzz words, consults a look-up table for Democrat talking points, then regurgitates those talking points. Being a pathetic hack and a complete moron are way beyond his programming.

You do love running away to that safe space.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

You're being too harsh.

I agree. Sometimes I think a 2x4 across the head might help him fire off a couple neurons...but I really should know better by now.

 

[Jaskalas]

Mere assertion of convenience utterly lacking in documentation.

With the tables turned, Obama now 'regrets' his 2006 Alito filibuster
But wait, there's more!
Democrats Blocked Bush Judicial Nominee for Entire Presidential Term
Additional names and details...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_W._Bush_judicial_appointment_controversies

Then there's this jewel, as I searched for number of successful filibusters...
Why the filibuster is OK for Democrats but not for Republicans.

Majority Party / Successful Filibuster
Democrat: 63
Republican: 89

I'm not sure which direction those numbers lean... but their point is fairly obvious. Both parties have done it frequently, and that was written by hardcore Dems in 2010.

Need I remind you what Harry Reid did as majority leader, shutting down nearly everything passed in the House, not allowing votes? You think your !@#$ don't stink?

 

[senseamp]

With the tables turned, Obama now 'regrets' his 2006 Alito filibuster
But wait, there's more!
Democrats Blocked Bush Judicial Nominee for Entire Presidential Term
Additional names and details...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_W._Bush_judicial_appointment_controversies

Then there's this jewel, as I searched for number of successful filibusters...
Why the filibuster is OK for Democrats but not for Republicans.
I'm not sure which direction those numbers lean... but their point is fairly obvious. Both parties have done it frequently, and that was written by hardcore Dems in 2010.

Need I remind you what Harry Reid did as majority leader, shutting down nearly everything passed in the House, not allowing votes? You think your !@#$ don't stink?

Article is from Feb 2010. GOP has gotten a lot crazier since.

 

[interchange]

Article is from Feb 2010. GOP has gotten a lot crazier since.

Thankfully I find this line of reasoning useless. Otherwise I would be tempted to discharge half of my patients from the hospital, because, honestly, they don't look anywhere near as sick as that guy down the hall.

All of this being said, since you are (at least in limited case) professing that filibuster is bad, do you have any ideas on what we can do about it?

 

[Jhhnn]

With the tables turned, Obama now 'regrets' his 2006 Alito filibuster
But wait, there's more!
Democrats Blocked Bush Judicial Nominee for Entire Presidential Term
Additional names and details...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_W._Bush_judicial_appointment_controversies

Then there's this jewel, as I searched for number of successful filibusters...
Why the filibuster is OK for Democrats but not for Republicans.
I'm not sure which direction those numbers lean... but their point is fairly obvious. Both parties have done it frequently, and that was written by hardcore Dems in 2010.

Need I remind you what Harry Reid did as majority leader, shutting down nearly everything passed in the House, not allowing votes? You think your !@#$ don't stink?

If the extent of Repub obstructionism matched that I wouldn't be complaining.

You're preaching false equivalence. What a surprise.