The McConnell-Ginsburg Rule?

  
By:  john-russell  •  one week ago  •  246 comments

The McConnell-Ginsburg Rule?
What will happen if there is a Supreme Court opening in 2020?  Would it surprise you to learn that prominent Republicans and conservatives are suggesting that McConnell should ignore his own "Garland rule" and confirm such a nominee as would be presented to them by Trump?

WASHINGTON — When Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was released from the hospital last weekend after another in a string of health scares, blue America breathed a sigh of relief. Only one more month, many whispered, until the start of a presidential election year when filling a vacancy on the Supreme Court would be off limits in the Senate.

But would it?

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/29/us/politics/senate-supreme-court-garland.html

30 days from today is New Years Eve, then 2020. There is a train of thought that suggests the Republicans have 30 days left to hope that Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg retires or in some other way is rendered unable to continue on the Court. According to recent precedent, the proper thing to do during a presidential election year is to delay the naming and confirmation of a replacement to the high court until the voters have selected a president in November. In 2016 President Obama nominated Judge Merrick Garland to fill the Supreme Court seat of Anton Scalia, who had suddenly passed away.  Mitch McConnell and the Republicans in the Senate would not allow hearings or a vote on Garland's nomination, using the justification that the voters should have a say on who the replacement SC Justice should be through their choice for president. 

Not too many people had a concrete understanding of what should happen, mainly because it was not a situation that had arisen much before in US history. So McConnell iron fisted his way to success with his scheme, and Garland's nomination withered away until it was dropped when a new president took office. 

What will happen if there is a Supreme Court opening in 2020?  Would it surprise you to learn that prominent Republicans and conservatives are suggesting that McConnell should ignore his own "Garland rule" and confirm such a nominee as would be presented to them by Trump?

Although McConnell is on record as having justified his treatment of Garland by saying that the voters should decide on which president will nominate a new SC Justice when the opening comes up in an election year, it is expected he would ignore his own argument and jam a Trump nominee through on the "reasoning" that , in this case, the same party holds the Senate and the White House, which was not the case in 2016. 

It is difficult to see what that has to do with justifying going against his own precept that the voters should have their say, but McConnell is not big on needing to justify his actions logically. 


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
smarty_function_ntUser_is_admin: user_id parameter required
Find text within the comments Find 
 
JohnRussell
1  author  JohnRussell    one week ago

Will McConnell be a man of honor in 2020, and deny Trump a Supreme Court nomination,  should one come open, on the same basis he denied Obama and Merrick Garland ? 

 
 
 
PJ
1.1  PJ  replied to  JohnRussell @1    one week ago

McConnell has already said himself that he will not follow the rule he placed on the previous president.  [Removed

 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.1.1  author  JohnRussell  replied to  PJ @1.1    one week ago

This is a "rhetorical" question. We all know he has no honor.  I wonder if independents and moderates will openly object to McConnell's stance when the time comes, or will they see "both sides" of this issue? 

 
 
 
PJ
1.1.2  PJ  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.1    one week ago

We know that the republicans on this site will not object for the same reason McConnell will break his own rule.  

 
 
 
Greg Jones
1.1.3  Greg Jones  replied to  PJ @1.1.2    one week ago

I doubt that the Honorable Justice Ginsburg will expire within the next few months. But it will not take too long to nominate and confirm a new Justice in as little as six months if the occasion arises. But Trump will be reelected and will have ample to time to appoint another Justice or two. I would expect Trump and the Republicans to take every political advantage that they can while they retain power in the WH and Senate, and hopefully in the House again after next years election. That is what the Democrats have done and would do again. Personally, I hope Trump and the Republicans pack the Court(s) with as many conservative judges as possible in order to save our country from the evil clutches of the Far Left.  

 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.1.4  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Greg Jones @1.1.3    one week ago

In all fairness, you don't seem to understand the issue. 

 
 
 
PJ
1.1.5  PJ  replied to  PJ @1.1    one week ago

None of the republican leadership have any honor.

 
 
 
1stwarrior
1.1.6  1stwarrior  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.4    one week ago

Beg to differ with you.  His point makes much more sense than the continued refighting of 2016.  It's gone and past and many just haven't recognized that the future keeps coming and the past keeps going.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.1.7  author  JohnRussell  replied to  1stwarrior @1.1.6    one week ago

You apparently don't understand the issue either. 

 
 
 
PJ
1.1.8  PJ  replied to  1stwarrior @1.1.6    one week ago

That's a dishonest framing of the situation.  I didn't expect any different though.  

 
 
 
Greg Jones
1.1.9  Greg Jones  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.4    one week ago

John, we can't help it if you are unable to comprehend and understand reality. If Ginsburg passes away, I hope the Republicans  (McConnell) would ram a conservative replacement through.

Do you hear me now? I can't explain it more clearly than that. All your little mini-put downs and dismissive insults show the weakness of your arguments and opinions.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.1.10  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Greg Jones @1.1.9    one week ago
John, we can't help it if you are unable to comprehend and understand reality.

So you are admiting that Republicans will lie and cheat (their own rules) to get conservatives put through.  Are you confused enough to think I dont already know that? 

 
 
 
Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom
1.1.11  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom  replied to  Greg Jones @1.1.3    one week ago
Personally, I hope Trump and the Republicans pack the Court(s) with as many conservative judges as possible in order to save our country from the evil clutches of the Far Left.  

Sugar, you need to get a hold of yourself.  I can see that you are scared beyond common sense, but my goodness!  

 
 
 
PJ
1.1.12  PJ  replied to  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom @1.1.11    one week ago

Talk about being removed from reality.  He supports the worst president in current times and the democrats are the problem?   This president is tearing the country apart with his divisive policies and his hate speech but yet the democrats are the problem?  jrSmiley_98_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Ronin2
1.1.13  Ronin2  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.7    one week ago

"Elections have consequences", to quote Obama.

The Dems don't control the Senate. That is their issue; not the Republicans. If Ginsburg retires, or expires, before Trump is out of office; and the Republicans hold the Senate- then they will nominate and confirm a new Supreme Court Justice. The same thing the Democrats would do it they held the senate and it was a Democratic president nominee.

What you should really be asking yourself is how the Republicans will react the next time a Democrat president nominates a new Supreme Court Justice after Bork, Thomas, and Kavanaugh BS by the Democrats. It won't matter if Republicans have power in the Senate or not. If they so desire they can create allegations; drag the nominee's entire life through the mud; and find every Republican that remotely knew the nominee to defame them. Should be a real three ring circus. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
1.1.14  Texan1211  replied to  PJ @1.1.12    one week ago
Talk about being removed from reality.  He supports the worst president in current times and the democrats are the problem?   This president is tearing the country apart with his divisive policies and his hate speech but yet the democrats are the problem?  

Democrats have choices:

Get on board, get left behind, or whine.

 
 
 
Texan1211
1.1.15  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.10    one week ago
So you are admiting that Republicans will lie and cheat (their own rules) to get conservatives put through

Did Democrats lie and cheat when they changed their own rules?

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
1.1.16  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  PJ @1.1.12    one week ago
 This president is tearing the country apart

nah, he is just destroying the progressives plans for our future while everyone else is having the time of their lives.

cheers :)

 
 
 
1stwarrior
1.1.17  1stwarrior  replied to  PJ @1.1.8    one week ago

Sanctimonious today?  Apparently only thoughts going your direction are proper?  That's a great thing about people PJ - everyone has THEIR opinion which is just as valid as anyone else's opinion.  Read what I wrote, think about it and then, if you wish, respond to it without your opinion and only use rationale, analytical thinking - not personal bias.

Thanks.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.1.18  author  JohnRussell  replied to  1stwarrior @1.1.17    one week ago
That's a great thing about people PJ - everyone has THEIR opinion which is just as valid as anyone else's opinion. 

Please stop spouting nonsense on my article. 

 
 
 
PJ
1.1.19  PJ  replied to  Texan1211 @1.1.14    one week ago

republicans have choices also;

  • American over Russia
  • Country over Party
  • Truth over Trump lies
  • Constitution over Corruption

History will never forget what this President and those who support him have done.

 
 
 
PJ
1.1.20  PJ  replied to  1stwarrior @1.1.17    one week ago

No, I'm tired and disappointed and still in shock how so many people who claim they are Americans can be so anti-American.

 
 
 
PJ
1.1.21  PJ  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @1.1.16    one week ago

No, he's destroying America by pitting us against each other.

Something you seem to think weirdly is a good thing.

 
 
 
Texan1211
1.1.22  Texan1211  replied to  PJ @1.1.19    one week ago

I like how often you get all melodramatic about the country!

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
1.1.23  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  PJ @1.1.21    one week ago
destroying America by pitting us against each other.

progressives (under obama) built that. 

just remember how much fun the left had telling us the gop is dead while obama was in office.

payback is a bitch huh?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.1.24  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Ronin2 @1.1.13    one week ago

It would be one thing if McConnell was going to violate "Democrats" rules for the senate, but he is going to violate HIS OWN rule. 

Obviously he has no honor and neither do those who approve. 

 
 
 
1stwarrior
1.1.25  1stwarrior  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.7    one week ago

From whose viewpoint John?  Not everyone has the same frame of mind that you have and they see/understand differing points in the written word.

The Dems/Libs in Congress can not get over losing the 2016 election and they are doing all within their power to unseat, through hook'r'crook, a sitting President - simply because they LOST THE 2016 Presidential election.

Though Democrats would lack procedural weapons, they and their allies say they would still mount a challenge using whatever tools available, and their attention would focus intently on the nominee.

And you thought Kavenaugh was a nasty battle????

Hook'r'crook - that is the issue - get used to it.

 
 
 
1stwarrior
1.1.26  1stwarrior  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.18    one week ago

Sorry it doesn't meet your mantra - and it's only nonsense to you - a single OPINION.

 
 
 
1stwarrior
1.1.27  1stwarrior  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.1    one week ago

"We all know"???  Quite a generalization there John.  Who is this "all" you're talking about?

 
 
 
PJ
1.1.28  PJ  replied to  Texan1211 @1.1.22    one week ago

It's called patriotism.  Maybe you should try it?

 
 
 
PJ
1.1.29  PJ  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @1.1.23    one week ago

I remember the gop and their supporters very upset that a negro got in the WH so you're right that under Obama the divide grew but it took solid root under Bush when he lied to Americans and ousted a CIA agent so his buddies at blackwater could make some money.

History has shown time and again how the republican party fucks everything up and the democrats have to come in and fix it.

The only thing I've seen that the republicans are better at is lying about what they're for and about what the democrats are for.

 
 
 
1stwarrior
1.1.30  1stwarrior  replied to  PJ @1.1.20    one week ago

Could you explain, please, just what is "American" and "anti-American" about following the Constitutional rules?

U. S. Constitution - Article II - 

Section 2

1: The President 

2: He shall . . .  nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint . . . . Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: 

Don't see anything here that sez the House is involved.  Do you?  It's just the Senate. So, you're saying that the Senate is "anti-American"?

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
1.1.31  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  PJ @1.1.29    one week ago
and about what the democrats are for.

so half the left is not interested in socialism?

interesting theory ya have there.  I wish that was true.

btw: socialists do not get to be called patriots.  

 
 
 
1stwarrior
1.1.32  1stwarrior  replied to  PJ @1.1.29    one week ago

Obama was White - 'member????  His mother was a full-blooded, non-hyphenated White woman.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.1.33  author  JohnRussell  replied to  1stwarrior @1.1.25    one week ago

1st, an opinion that it is OK for McConnell to break HIS OWN rule from the last Supreme Court nomination , because Democrats oppose Trump,  is NOT a valid opinion.  It is stupidity. 

In 2016 they ( the Republicans) went through a great deal to establish the precedent that a Supreme Court nomination should not occur in a presidential election year. And they were successful.  That precedent is now in existence. 

 
 
 
PJ
1.1.34  PJ  replied to  1stwarrior @1.1.30    one week ago

Can you answer me one question.  Based on the information you posted would you say that what McConnell did to Obama was anti-american since it went against the Constitution?

If you're honest I think you'll be able to answer the question you posed to me.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.1.35  author  JohnRussell  replied to  1stwarrior @1.1.32    one week ago
Obama was White - 'member????  His mother was a full-blooded, non-hyphenated White woman.

Obama was not white. 

In the United States people self-identify as to race, within reason. In other words, if Obama, or anyone else, says he is black based on a black parent, then he is black.  Case closed. Only racists argue otherwise. 

More and more mixed race people identify as mixed race, not black or white, and that is a good thing. 

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
1.1.36  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  1stwarrior @1.1.25    one week ago

1st,

Hold on there. John is right. When Obama presented the moderate judge Garland, McConnell insisted that a judge could not be appointed during an election year, and the seat was put aside till after the election. Well, if something happens to judge Ginsberg, that rule should still apply. 

Anything else is a double standard. 

 
 
 
Jack_TX
1.1.37  Jack_TX  replied to  PJ @1.1.21    one week ago
No, he's destroying America by pitting us against each other.

We were already pitted against each other.  He's not doing it, he's just capitalizing on it.

So are Warren, Sanders, and AOC, BTW.

 
 
 
1stwarrior
1.1.38  1stwarrior  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.33    one week ago

John - let's do "tit-for-tat", OK?  

My statement - "everyone has THEIR opinion which is just as valid as anyone else's opinion."

Please show me, in the above statement, where I said "an opinion that it is OK for McConnell to break HIS OWN rule from the last Supreme Court nomination , because Democrats oppose Trump," was the OPINION that I had.  

My opinion is that the past is gone and the future is coming - quit fighting over spilled milk and hurt feelings and start working TOGETHER for the future.

That was my "OPINION".

See how differently we think?

 
 
 
PJ
1.1.39  PJ  replied to  1stwarrior @1.1.32    one week ago

Hahahahaha - says the native american.  

You should know that any drop of negro zeros out any other blood someone has in them.  Just like native americans were treated differently even if they had mixed blood.  Whites never accepted them.

I enjoyed your argument though. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.1.40  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @1.1.36    one week ago

Let's see if they listen to you.  I of course agree with you, but the same argument is made in the article and throughout the thread and they simply ignore it. 

 
 
 
PJ
1.1.41  PJ  replied to  Jack_TX @1.1.37    one week ago

Oh.....okay.  The old 9 year old argument "but they did it too!".  

Yes, let's not expect our President to rise above it and be a leader to ALL Americans.  jrSmiley_84_smiley_image.gif  

 
 
 
1stwarrior
1.1.42  1stwarrior  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @1.1.36    one week ago

And McConnell was/is wrong - according to the Constitution - that's my point - that I haven't made to John, but have to others on this thread.

Per the Constitution, it is the President's duty to appoint a Justice for the Supreme Court.  There are/were no boundary lines drawn as to when that appointment was/is to be made.  The Senate, somehow, sometime, decided to set the standards for the appointment - did they have that authority?  Not according to the Constitution.  The only "job" of the Senate, in this situation, is to "advise and consent" - not to set standards.

 
 
 
1stwarrior
1.1.43  1stwarrior  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.35    one week ago

Are you serious?????  Now who's being racist?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.1.44  author  JohnRussell  replied to  1stwarrior @1.1.38    one week ago
My opinion is that the past is gone and the future is coming - quit fighting over spilled milk and hurt feelings and start working TOGETHER for the future. That was my "OPINION".

Ok, after McConnell says that he will NOT confirm a Supreme Court nomination in 2020 (should an opening exist) we will think about "together" , not before. 

This article was about a specific topic, Ginsburgs health issues have led to speculation that there could be a Supreme Court opening in the election year. 

The article is not about anything else, such as conservatives desire to pack the court, or about Democrats. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.1.45  author  JohnRussell  replied to  1stwarrior @1.1.43    one week ago

You obviously do not understand the issue.  Having a white parent does not automatically make you white in this society.  I have no idea where you get that idea, although I have seen it spouted by right wingers. 

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
1.1.46  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @1.1.36    one week ago
a double standard. 

reminds me when obama said he could not change immigration laws by executive order

does daca ring any bells?

 
 
 
1stwarrior
1.1.47  1stwarrior  replied to  PJ @1.1.34    one week ago

PJ - don't care if it's the House or the Senate - they can't change what the Constitution says regardless of how they feel.  Even "tweaking" sections of the Constitution to fit the purpose they desire is not allowed - per the Constitution.

Yeah - and I argued against what Biden and McConnell did because it does/did not conform to the written guidance of the Constitution.  Hell, even Tip O'Neill wouldn't have tried to pass such a "resolution" and he was a helluva lot stronger and more savvy than Biden and McConnell in the political jungle.

 
 
 
1stwarrior
1.1.48  1stwarrior  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.44    one week ago

And I have not attempted to make it such.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
1.1.49  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  1stwarrior @1.1.42    one week ago

1st,

How convenient to say that McConnell was wrong, now. Where were you when he did this with judge Garland? 

Once something is established as rule of order, it should be applied equally.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
1.1.50  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @1.1.46    one week ago

Stop throwing in a red herring with executive orders. This issue has nada to do with executive orders.

 
 
 
Texan1211
1.1.51  Texan1211  replied to  PJ @1.1.28    one week ago
It's called patriotism.  Maybe you should try it?

I like it when your classy rebuttal is nothing more than a personal attack!

Shows me you have no argument worth making.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
1.1.52  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Jack_TX @1.1.37    one week ago

I have to agree with you Jack. Hence why I am looking for someone who can unify this country as president and why I am not for impeachment. 

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
1.1.53  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  PJ @1.1.41    one week ago
and be a leader to ALL Americans.   

trump did not promise to be a leader for progressives or socialists.

he promised to stand against them and their regressive ideology

so yeah, some are being ignored and will be left behind.

 
 
 
PJ
1.1.54  PJ  replied to  1stwarrior @1.1.47    one week ago

Well McConnell did it and no republicans rose up and demanded he not go against the Constitution.  He should have been removed immediately but he was cheered and praised for doing it to give the republican party a win over the country and the constitution.  I'm sick of you guys pretending you value the constitution when you turn your head while your side fucks america over.

McConnell breaks the rules but demands the democrats follow the rules.  He is anti american and anyone who supports or stands with him stands against america.

 
 
 
PJ
1.1.55  PJ  replied to  Texan1211 @1.1.51    one week ago

If I said something like, you're a moron.  That would be an example of a personal attack.

Answering your question and suggesting you unite with me is not a personal attack.  

 
 
 
Texan1211
1.1.56  Texan1211  replied to  PJ @1.1.54    one week ago
He is anti american and anyone who supports or stands with him stands against america.

Lordy, Lordy, look at the hyperbole being bandied about like someone mucking a stall!

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
1.1.57  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @1.1.50    one week ago
Stop throwing in a red herring with executive orders.

double standards are double standards no matter how or where they come from.

the left has just realized two can play the double standard game.

the left started this culture war... so, heads up, war is not fair.

 

 
 
 
Texan1211
1.1.58  Texan1211  replied to  PJ @1.1.55    one week ago

I am always amazed at the amount of hubris involved in calling people who disagree with you non-patriots.

It is pretty funny!

And a sign of a weak-sauce "argument".

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
1.1.59  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @1.1.57    one week ago

Look, Trump has made more executive orders than Obama has for the same period of time. They still have nothing to do with what we are talking about. 

And I am not talking about "Culture Wars either".

 
 
 
PJ
1.1.60  PJ  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @1.1.53    one week ago

3/4 of americans are being ignored.  When a President ignores the majority of americans it's no longer a democracy.  

Let me just say that the democratic leadership have finally realized that the republican leadership and party will NEVER play by the rules.  

The republican leadership are setting a precedence and by god the democrats are going to pick up the mantle when they are in power.  

America is witnessing first hand how the middle east tribes and fighting ensued.  We are watching it develop here in America thanks to this Administration.

Rest assured, whether I help someone or not will be determined by whether they support this President or not.  

 
 
 
Texan1211
1.1.61  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.44    one week ago

Why are you going on about a hypothetical event?

 
 
 
PJ
1.1.62  PJ  replied to  Texan1211 @1.1.58    one week ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
1.1.63  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @1.1.59    one week ago
Trump has made more executive orders than Obama

yepp... that is how ya undue previous executive orders.

fight fire with even more fire. tried and true.

And I am not talking about "Culture Wars either".

I am.... but I always factor the bigger picture

 
 
 
Jack_TX
1.1.64  Jack_TX  replied to  PJ @1.1.41    one week ago
Oh.....okay.  The old 9 year old argument "but they did it too!".  

The 9 year old argument is imagining that Americans and American politics are binary, that your "team" can do no wrong and bears no culpability in the current state of affairs.

Yes, let's not expect our President to rise above it and be a leader to ALL Americans.

You can expect whatever you like, but the fact is that almost never happens unless we're at war.  Reagan is the closest we've had since WWII, unless you count GWB in the few weeks after 9-11.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
1.1.65  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @1.1.63    one week ago

Thanks for playing! 

Cheers :)

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
1.1.66  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @1.1.65    one week ago

my pleasure :)

 
 
 
PJ
1.1.67  PJ  replied to  Jack_TX @1.1.64    one week ago

We ARE at war.  We are at war with each other!!!  Don't you see that?  It's far more dangerous than being at war with another country.  

 
 
 
Texan1211
1.1.68  Texan1211  replied to  PJ @1.1.60    one week ago
3/4 of americans are being ignored.  When a President ignores the majority of americans it's no longer a democracy.  

Load of crap.

The republican leadership are setting a precedence and by god the democrats are going to pick up the mantle when they are in power.  

Sounds more like you are pissed that the GOP beat the Democrats at their own game. 

America is witnessing how the middle east tribes and fighting ensued.  We are watching it develop here in America thanks to this Administration.

More Chicken Little nonsense.

Rest assured, whether I help someone or not will be determined by whether they support this President or not.  

What an altruistic act!

 
 
 
Jack_TX
1.1.69  Jack_TX  replied to  PJ @1.1.60    one week ago
3/4 of americans are being ignored.

This is a bit of a ridiculous statement.  Is there more to your assertion than emotion?

Rest assured, whether I help someone or not will be determined by whether they support this President or not.

Personally, my integrity and character are not dependent upon other people's political views.   But you make whatever decision you feel you can live with.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
1.1.70  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  PJ @1.1.67    one week ago

I have to agree with that PJ. 

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
1.1.71  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  PJ @1.1.67    one week ago
We are at war with each other!!!

progressives started this war.... talk to them.

I find it funny how the left starts conflict and then once they lose they cry for civility.

makes me laugh every day :)

 
 
 
Texan1211
1.1.72  Texan1211  replied to  PJ @1.1.62    one week ago
Yes, I'm aware the gop considers truth to be a sign of weakness.

“It isn't so much that liberals are ignorant. It's just that they know so many things that aren't so.”     Ronald Reagan--right then, right now.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
1.1.73  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @1.1.71    one week ago

Oh please. Both extremes sides of the parties caused this. One knee jerk reaction after another. I am so tired of the blame game. We are suffering because of a minority of people from each party.

 
 
 
bugsy
1.1.74  bugsy  replied to  PJ @1.1.12    one week ago
divisive policies and his hate speech

Be specific about what these "divisive policies and hate speech" are? Just because you do not like Trump does not mean his policies are divisive or he has hate speech. If you decide to divide yourself from the positives of what this country is going through, then that's on you.

Even the person who hates Trump like he has never hated anyone before, or will since, the seeder of this post, can only cite that he "lies" and that his name is not Hillary to slam the President.

Maybe you can do better?

 
 
 
PJ
1.1.75  PJ  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @1.1.70    one week ago

Some are too shortsighted to see the bigger picture.  They've been brainwashed that this is just another super bowl, it's just two team fighting and afterwards the slate is wiped clean.   

This will have lasting affects to our country.  We have become the hatfields and the mccoys and it's going to take a miracle to bridge the divide.

 
 
 
PJ
1.1.76  PJ  replied to  bugsy @1.1.74    one week ago

If you are not capable of seeing for yourself that some of his language is hateful and some of his policies are questionable then nothing I offer is going to make a difference.

It sounds like you are absolutely fine with everything this president has said and done.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
1.1.77  Jack_TX  replied to  PJ @1.1.67    one week ago
We ARE at war.

In fact, we are not.  That's melodrama.

  We are at war with each other!!!  Don't you see that?

You're talking about people's emotions.  The thing about emotions is....the people having them are the only ones who can change them.  They can decide to feel differently.  They can decide to stop panicking about Trump or immigrants or Trump or rampaging socialists or Trump or bathrooms.

A president cannot change their "feelings".  That's up to them.

  It's far more dangerous than being at war with another country.  

When we start playing taps over flag draped coffins of kids killed in battles on US soil, that won't be silly.

 
 
 
PJ
1.1.78  PJ  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @1.1.71    one week ago

Well they do say ignorance is bliss.  

 
 
 
bugsy
1.1.79  bugsy  replied to  PJ @1.1.21    one week ago
he's destroying America by pitting us against each other

Wrong..

Liberals have decided to go the " we hate Trump" direction simply because he is not Hillary. You have no legitimate reason as to why you don't like him.

Many conservatives did not like Obama for his policies, but liberals decided to take the low road and continuously call us racist every time we criticized him.

Nothing Trump has done makes me want to hate another American, however, because liberals hate Trump, by default, they hate Trump supporters.

Your comments about Trump supporters prove my point.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
1.1.80  Jack_TX  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @1.1.73    one week ago
We are suffering because of a minority of people from each party.

I don't think we're actually suffering. 

I think some people like to believe we're suffering.  They're kinda like that teenager who thinks having a curfew is the same a being in a Gulag.

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
1.1.81  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  PJ @1.1.78    one week ago
Well they do say ignorance is bliss.

true.. so why is the left upset?

 
 
 
bugsy
1.1.82  bugsy  replied to  PJ @1.1.28    one week ago
It's called patriotism

Patriotism is not hating those that simply support someone you don't like.

 
 
 
bugsy
1.1.83  bugsy  replied to  PJ @1.1.67    one week ago
We are at war with each other!!! 

Wrong. Liberals are at war with the right simply because they don't like who they support.

No other reason...

 
 
 
bugsy
1.1.84  bugsy  replied to  PJ @1.1.60    one week ago
whether I help someone or not will be determined by whether they support this President or not.  

Pretty selfish of you, and not very.....liberal.

Are you saying that if someone falls out on the street, you are going to ask them who they voted for, and if they say Trump, you are just going to walk away?

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
1.1.85  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @1.1.73    one week ago
One knee jerk reaction after another.

it started in the 60's but in 08 progressives went into overdrive.

today? I am a member of the bitter clinging, bible-thumping, deplorable cult who belongs in a basket...  and loving every minute of it.

for the first time in my life I have hope for our countries long term survival as a sovereign nation.

trump did everyone a favor, under hillary this culture war would have gone hot. states would be leaving the union as we speak.

 
 
 
bugsy
1.1.86  bugsy  replied to  PJ @1.1.76    one week ago
If you are not capable of seeing for yourself that some of his language is hateful and some of his policies are questionable then nothing I offer is going to make a difference.

So you have nothing, just parroting what you are told to parrot.

Where did I say I am absolutely fine with everything he has said and done? I just don't go full blown whiny because of what he says or does.

 
 
 
PJ
1.1.87  PJ  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @1.1.71    one week ago

I'm curious, what did the progressives do that started this war?  I'm asking genuinely.  Maybe I'm missing something that will help me look at this differently.

 
 
 
PJ
1.1.88  PJ  replied to  bugsy @1.1.82    one week ago

It's banding together against those who would side with putin over fellow americans.

 
 
 
PJ
1.1.89  PJ  replied to  bugsy @1.1.84    one week ago

I'll try and ascertain whether they are a trump supporter based on what they might be accessorizing with, e.g. racist MAGA hat, grab my pussy t-shirt, trump/pence bumper sticker, or if they're carrying a bible.  If I can't make the determination then I'll casually ask.  

No, I won't just walk away.  I'll give them the finger first and then walk away.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
1.1.90  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Jack_TX @1.1.80    one week ago

Jack,

I have to disagree with you here. It might be because I am looking at the big picture and not this specific moment in time. 

When Obama got elected we instantly had a backlash. The Tea Party was formed, and anything Obama did was bad. I didn't vote for the guy, but I was not blind to the fact, that right wing was going to fight him to the end on any policy good or bad. Even his citizenship was endlessly debated. 

Then we got Trump, and things got even more ramped up. The tweeting didn't help the situation either. But really, how different is what the left is doing from what the right did? In fact, not at all. 

And what bothers me, is that there are people within each party and loads of people who have become indies who agree with my perception. 

Just look at this non-discussion going on in this article. I find it beyond annoying. People on both sides go right to their talking points and have no interest in listening to each other. 

They're kinda like that teenager who thinks having a curfew is the same a being in a Gulag.

I guess your point is that is an exaggeration and I would have to agree that there is a lot of hyperbole going on, but I see it from both sides. And I know that John will be pissed at that, but it happened with Obama and it happened with Trump, instantaneously upon election. 

 
 
 
bugsy
1.1.91  bugsy  replied to  PJ @1.1.88    one week ago
against those who would side with putin over fellow americans.

Who did that, and show proof, real proof, not feelings, of your accusations?

BTW....American is ALWAYS spelled with a capital A. Your failure to continuously not abide by that shows your real feelings towards those that do not think like you.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.1.92  author  JohnRussell  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @1.1.85    one week ago
trump did everyone a favor, under hillary this culture war would have gone hot. states would be leaving the union as we speak.

Personally, I like it when Trump supporters openly explain themselves like this. We achieve clarity. 

 
 
 
bugsy
1.1.93  bugsy  replied to  PJ @1.1.89    one week ago
I'll try and ascertain whether they are a trump supporter based on what they might be accessorizing with, e.g. racist MAGA hat, grab my pussy t-shirt, trump/pence bumper sticker, or if they're carrying a bible.  If I can't make the determination then I'll casually ask.   No, I won't just walk away.  I'll give them the finger first and then walk away.

Of course you will...and you say conservatives are the loony ones?

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
1.1.94  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @1.1.85    one week ago
I am a member of the bitter clinging, bible-thumping, deplorable cult who belongs in a basket...  and loving every minute of it.

Then how the hell can you support Trump? You call yourself a bible thumper? He was cheating husband, a liar, talks like a pig, and was and is a disgusting human being. He was that before he was elected and I know that as a fact, as a New Yorker. 

How can you support him and be a Christian at the same time?

 
 
 
PJ
1.1.95  PJ  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @1.1.90    one week ago

The difference is that Obama didn't side with Russia over his own intel communities, he didn't invite other countries to interfere in our elections, he didn't sympathize with racists, he didn't misuse appropriations to pad his pockets, he didn't call other americans enemy of the country and he didn't try to squelch freedom of speech.

There is a difference.  Both sides are not the same.

 
 
 
1stwarrior
1.1.96  1stwarrior  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @1.1.49    one week ago

Perrie - read 1.1.47 - hell, even Biden was wrong in '92 when he implemented the rule.

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
1.1.97  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  PJ @1.1.87    one week ago

as the bs really started in the 60's that answer is wayyyyyy to big for a sunday chat.

but I will say this... starting n 08

when a president told us he was going to fundamentally change our country? said this was not a christian country or called us bitter clingers and bible thumpers that might have had something to do with it.  could have been obamacare, could have been daca, might even have been trying to control speech they did not like with censorship. and when the left called us teabaggers, that might have played a part as well. then again, perhaps it was being called deplorable? or nazi's? or russian bots? god only knows, it was all the above and then some.

I gotta admit, describing us as a cult?  that was new... LOL

now? trump is restoring our country and reversing 60yrs of progressive bs. 

it is a big job. I wish him godspeed.

the lefts plan to destroy our culture and country from within did not have provisions for the right refusing to play along?     the left didn't think it through.

 

 

 

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
1.1.98  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  1stwarrior @1.1.96    one week ago

1st, Biden might have been wrong, but it was done again, by McConnell, who cited Biden doing it. Now he's changing his mind? That is total hypocrisy. 

 
 
 
PJ
1.1.99  PJ  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @1.1.97    one week ago

You didn't answer my question.  What exactly happened in the "60's" that you think started this war?  

 
 
 
bugsy
1.1.100  bugsy  replied to  PJ @1.1.99    one week ago
What exactly happened in the "60's" that you think started this war?  

I was born in the mid 60s, so I don't have direct knowledge, however, my guess would be liberals spitting on our soldiers coming back from Vietnam.

I think that if many liberals of today thought they could get away with it, and not ceremoniously get their asses beat, they would continue the practice today.

 
 
 
PJ
1.1.101  PJ  replied to  bugsy @1.1.100    one week ago

That's your best guess?  lol bugsy. 

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
1.1.102  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  PJ @1.1.99    one week ago
You didn't answer my question. 

I did.  that is when the left started tearing at our culture.

here is a hint: ya don't remember The Weather Underground?  go figure... LOL as a nation we forgot. but in 09 thru today = we started to remember again.

The Weather Underground Organization (WUO), commonly known as the Weather Underground, was a radical left militant organization active in the late 1960s and 1970s,

and as I stated that conversation would take way too long for a sunday chat. so I'm not going to even start.

don't worry, you will get over it :)

 
 
 
bugsy
1.1.103  bugsy  replied to  PJ @1.1.101    one week ago
That's your best guess?

I'm probably far closer than you can imagine.

 
 
 
PJ
1.1.104  PJ  replied to  bugsy @1.1.103    one week ago

Nope - you were a baby.  You have no idea.  You're just guessing.   Nice try

 
 
 
Greg Jones
1.1.105  Greg Jones  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.33    one week ago
That precedent is now in existence. 

If they remain in power, they are free to set a new precedent.

The whole idea while in power is to use it to the fullest extent possible. .

 
 
 
PJ
1.1.106  PJ  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @1.1.102    one week ago

Hahahahahahahaha - 

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
1.1.107  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  PJ @1.1.106    one week ago

I'm glad I could make ya laugh... 

I seriously hope you also enjoy the next 5 yrs of trump as your president.  ya have lots more laughs coming.

cheers :)

 
 
 
Greg Jones
1.1.108  Greg Jones  replied to  PJ @1.1.34    one week ago

  Based on the information you posted would you say that what McConnell did to Obama was anti-american since it went against the Constitution?

It never went beyond the Constitution. They can refuse to consider advising or consenting to any nominee. Look it up.

 
 
 
Kavika
1.1.109  Kavika   replied to  bugsy @1.1.100    one week ago
I think that if many liberals of today thought they could get away with it, and not ceremoniously get their asses beat, they would continue the practice today.

Well, bugsy I'm a dem/liberal and served two combat tours in Vietnam. My son is a dem and served combat tours as a US Marine in the ME (purple heart) and of course, my dad was  Marine in WWII, silver star and purple with three oak leaf clusters and a dem.

You should have been at our house for Thanksgiving this year. You would have enjoyed meeting my bil and sil, 24 years Army Infantry (purple heart and Bronze Star with V device) and 20 years Army signal corp. Oh and Jerry our neighbor US Army (purple heart). And Kate another neighbor whose husband served 24 years Army (purple heart with oak leaf cluster). 

Oh, and my bil and sil grandson called from Lackland AFB on Thanksgiving day and my great-grandson called from Australia he's SAS (Special Air Service - Australian Special forces) they too are liberals.

I'm sure that you're aware of the old saying about assumptions.

 
 
 
Greg Jones
1.1.110  Greg Jones  replied to  PJ @1.1.89    one week ago
I'll give them the finger first and then walk away.
How adult and mature of you!
 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
1.1.111  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  Kavika @1.1.109    one week ago

for every one liberal in the military, there are thousands of rightwingnuts

ya know what they say about math...

 
 
 
1stwarrior
1.1.112  1stwarrior  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @1.1.98    one week ago

Didn't say they weren't/aren't.  In my opinion though, the Constitution prohibits what they are doing.

 
 
 
PJ
1.1.113  PJ  replied to  Greg Jones @1.1.110    one week ago

You admire Trump and all his childish immature actions but you think I'm immature......lol

I'm not at all concerned about what a trump supporter thinks about me.  

 
 
 
bugsy
1.1.114  bugsy  replied to  PJ @1.1.104    one week ago
You're just guessing. 

Exactly what I said. Thanks for agreeing with me

 
 
 
PJ
1.1.115  PJ  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @1.1.107    one week ago

You make me laugh quite a bit.  

I have no idea what the next election will bring.  It definitely could be another term of Donald Trump.  If that happens I think it will damage America for a very long time.  

 
 
 
PJ
1.1.116  PJ  replied to  bugsy @1.1.114    one week ago

Yes, we agree you're just making shit up.  jrSmiley_82_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
1.1.117  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  PJ @1.1.60    one week ago
3/4 of americans are being ignored.  When a President ignores the majority of americans it's no longer a democracy. 

3/4? not a chance.. LOL 1/4th of the country spread out in 30 states could not have elected trump... too funny.

btw the usa is not a democracy. never was, never will be. and that would be why hillary winning the national popular vote means nothing.

your democracy is in your state govt.

cheers :)

 
 
 
bugsy
1.1.118  bugsy  replied to  Kavika @1.1.109    one week ago
I'm sure that you're aware of the old saying about assumptions.

Um, that's why I said it was a guess.

PJ asked a question, I responded by saying I was very young in the 60s, but my guess is...

That means it was an opinion. I didn't say unequivocally a fact.

That still does not take away that it was probably liberals that spit on our soldiers during Nam. 

 
 
 
bugsy
1.1.119  bugsy  replied to  PJ @1.1.116    one week ago
Yes, we agree you're just making shit up

Well, that essentially is what a guess is.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
1.1.120  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @1.1.111    one week ago
for every one liberal in the military, there are thousands of rightwingnuts ya know what they say about math...

Prove that.

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
1.1.121  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  PJ @1.1.115    one week ago
If that happens I think it will damage America for a very long time.  

nah, america will be just fine, better than ever. progressives? not so much.

 
 
 
Kavika
1.1.122  Kavika   replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @1.1.111    one week ago
ya know what they say about math...

I surely do. ''Figures lie and liars figure. 

Which are you?

 
 
 
Kavika
1.1.123  Kavika   replied to  bugsy @1.1.118    one week ago

An opinion is a personal view about a fact, whereas an assumption is a belief without any or total proof.

BTW, thank you for your service bugsy.

 
 
 
bugsy
1.1.124  bugsy  replied to  Kavika @1.1.123    one week ago
BTW, thank you for your service bugsy.

Thank you. And the same for your family and friends.

 
 
 
Kavika
1.1.125  Kavika   replied to  bugsy @1.1.124    one week ago

Thanks, bugsy.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
1.1.126  Jack_TX  replied to  PJ @1.1.87    one week ago
I'm curious, what did the progressives do that started this war?  I'm asking genuinely.  Maybe I'm missing something that will help me look at this differently.

Personally, I saw a huge uptick in cross-party animosity develop during the passage of the Affordable Care Act.  The 2010 election reinforces that development, IMO.  

That was made worse by the constant accusations that anybody who thought the ACA was bad legislation must be a racist.  It was made still worse by the accusations that anybody who doesn't have a problem with a co-pay for oral contraceptives is a misogynist engaged in a "war on women", or the accusations that anyone who recognizes "identifying" as a woman doesn't actually make you one is a homophobe.

In the past you have described how the fact that Trump is in the WH has emboldened the worst of his followers to come out from the rocks under which they usually hide.  The same was true of the worst of Obama's supporters, who assaulted the character of anyone who didn't get completely on board with the far left agenda they mistakenly believed he would advance.

I believe social media is a major catalyst for the animosity uptick.  Whackjob extremists used to be isolated.  Social media enables them to connect with each other and delude themselves into thinking their ideas are actually normal.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
1.1.127  Jack_TX  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @1.1.90    one week ago
I have to disagree with you here.

As it turns out...maybe not so much.

When Obama got elected we instantly had a backlash. The Tea Party was formed, and anything Obama did was bad. I didn't vote for the guy, but I was not blind to the fact, that right wing was going to fight him to the end on any policy good or bad. Even his citizenship was endlessly debated. 

The Tea Party was a whackadoodle bunch of extremists with almost zero influence...until the ACA was passed.  Then, all of a sudden they became the group most capable of stopping any further damage.  Huge numbers of politicians fail to realize that lots of the people who voted for them were really simply voting against the other guy, and mistakenly believe they have some sort of mandate that extends far beyond what it really does.  The Tea Party certainly made that mistake.

Then we got Trump, and things got even more ramped up.

Absolutely.

The tweeting didn't help the situation either.

Twitter will be the end of American civilization.

But really, how different is what the left is doing from what the right did? In fact, not at all. 

I'm not saying it is.  I simply said we aren't suffering.  The economic figures are very clear on that.

People who cannot control their emotions and allow things other people say to influence those emotions are suffering.  But they will always suffer, no matter who is in the WH or what else is happening.  That's on them.  They alone can solve that problem.

And what bothers me, is that there are people within each party and loads of people who have become indies who agree with my perception.  Just look at this non-discussion going on in this article. I find it beyond annoying. People on both sides go right to their talking points and have no interest in listening to each other. 

Listening to others requires intellectual effort.  Most people are lazy.

I guess your point is that is an exaggeration and I would have to agree that there is a lot of hyperbole going on, but I see it from both sides.

My point is that sticks and stones can break their bones, but words can only hurt them if they agree to be hurt.  

And I know that John will be pissed at that, but it happened with Obama and it happened with Trump, instantaneously upon election. 

Yes, those words get thrown from both sides.  Yes, John will be unhappy.  But he's a perfect example of what we're talking about. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
1.1.128  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.1    one week ago
I wonder if independents and moderates will openly object to McConnell's stance when the time comes, or will they see "both sides" of this issue? 

There is a substantial difference between independent and moderate.   Independents do not abide by partisan positions and instead think for themselves.   Moderates, as you apparently see them, simply look for common ground.   

The obvious independent position is that the rule applies regardless of the party of the sitting PotUS.    Also, I suspect McConnell would break the rule using a weak excuse such as Trump is an incumbent whereas Obama was term limited or equivalent.

 
 
 
dennis smith
1.1.129  dennis smith  replied to  PJ @1.1.19    one week ago

Just as it will never forget what every past president has done to this country. 

 
 
 
dennis smith
1.1.130  dennis smith  replied to  PJ @1.1.29    one week ago

Bring race into it when you have nothing substantive to say. Sad that you need to do that

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.1.131  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.1    one week ago

That's a big "if" since RBG seems to keep rolling along. However if an opening comes up and this President gets to fill it, courtesy of the Senate Leader, progressives will finally get to find out what a double standard feels like. It will be good for them.

 
 
 
Snuffy
1.1.132  Snuffy  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @1.1.98    one week ago
1st, Biden might have been wrong, but it was done again, by McConnell, who cited Biden doing it. Now he's changing his mind? That is total hypocrisy. 

well,  not really.  What it is, is politics.

 
 
 
bbl-1
1.1.133  bbl-1  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @1.1.36    one week ago

Except McConnell has already publicly stated that he would fill the seat.

 
 
 
Gulliver-Swift
1.1.134  Gulliver-Swift  replied to  PJ @1.1    one week ago
McConnell has already said himself that he will not follow the rule he placed on the previous president. 

Already asked and answered. Why is the NYT acting like there is any doubt?

 
 
 
Ronin2
1.1.135  Ronin2  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.24    one week ago

So where were you when the Crypt Keeper Harry Reid violated his own rule and changed how the Senate approves judges? Don't remember any of the Dems having a problem with going nuclear. In fact they flat out blamed the Republicans for it and were applauded.  Of course they screamed murder when McConnell refused to change the rules back once the Republicans took power, and Trump won the Presidency.

To repeat Obama's words of wisdom, "elections have consequences". 

Want to make the rules in the Senate? Want to nominate judges? Then win some elections. Until then, to paraphrase Obama, "Democrats can ride with us if they want; but they have to sit in the back seat". (And the left is shocked when anyone calls Obama divisive.) With the way they are acting I would suggest baby car seat facing away from the front. Wouldn't want to scare them when they see what is coming. 

This false sense of outrage from the left is quite amusing. Don't worry, chances are the Dems will retake the Senate (If they don't screw the pooch with the impeachment. Not looking good for them now).. Then it will be Republican's turn to be outraged again.

 
 
 
Tessylo
1.1.136  Tessylo  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.1    one week ago

Yeah, I was going to say, McConnell, honor?

jrSmiley_86_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Tessylo
1.1.137  Tessylo  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.7    one week ago

Nothing that he said makes one damned bit of sense.  

 
 
 
Tessylo
1.1.138  Tessylo  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @1.1.53    one week ago

This 'president' is supposed to be a leader to all.  Not just those who voted for him or who lined his pockets.  

 
 
 
Tessylo
1.1.139  Tessylo  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @1.1.73    one week ago
'We are suffering because of a minority of people from each party.'

Nope, we are suffering thanks to the majority of the gop and this 'president' and his completely corrupt cabinet.   

 
 
 
Tessylo
1.1.140  Tessylo  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @1.1.97    one week ago

President Obama was so right about those who cling to their guns, bibles, and their ignorance.  

 
 
 
Tessylo
1.1.141  Tessylo  replied to  Kavika @1.1.122    one week ago
'I surely do. ''Figures lie and liars figure. 
Which are you?'

The latter?  A whackjob.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
1.1.142  Jack_TX  replied to  TᵢG @1.1.128    one week ago
There is a substantial difference between independent and moderate. 

There is, however, substantial overlap between the two groups.

 
 
 
TᵢG
1.1.143  TᵢG  replied to  Jack_TX @1.1.142    one week ago
There is, however, substantial overlap between the two groups.

For different reasons though than what I suspect you are thinking.   

Note first that there are R independents and D independents.   An independent (as I was using the term) is not a political affiliation — it is a philosophy of reasoning.   One can be a registered R, D, Green, etc.  (and of course I) and think independent of the party line (not simply accept party positions as best).   

Moderates (again, as I see them defined) follow the flawed philosophy that the best solution is always somewhere in the middle.   That if one finds compromise between R and D the compromise will necessarily be a good thing.   That seems silly to me and thus I tend to see the label 'moderate' as an insult.   'Independent', in contrast, correlates with objective reasoning / critical thinking.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
1.1.144  Jack_TX  replied to  TᵢG @1.1.143    one week ago
Moderates (again, as I see them defined) follow the flawed philosophy that the best solution is always somewhere in the middle.

I disagree with your definition, which seems to me to be almost oxymoronic.

To describe a "moderate" using words like "always" and "necessarily" seems a little strange.  The person you describe would simply be a pacifist, not a moderate.

A moderate is simply a person who tends to reject extreme views for the folly that they are, without regard to the opinions of the lunatic fringe one way or the other.

 
 
 
TᵢG
1.1.145  TᵢG  replied to  Jack_TX @1.1.144    one week ago
I disagree with your definition, which seems to me to be almost oxymoronic.

Clearly it is not oxymoronic since you have noted that it equates with pacifist (which almost works for me).   To me, as I noted, the moderate holds that there is truth in both sides of a debate and that the real truth is somewhere in the middle.  

A moderate is simply a person who tends to reject extreme views for the folly that they are, without regard to the opinions of the lunatic fringe one way or the other.

By that definition, most people are moderates.   I think your scope is too broad.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
1.1.146  Jack_TX  replied to  TᵢG @1.1.145    one week ago
To me, as I noted, the moderate holds that there is truth in both sides of a debate and that the real truth is somewhere in the middle.

I like that better.

By that definition, most people are moderates.   I think your scope is too broad.

I think most people are moderates.  I think most intelligent people are certainly moderates. 

The vast majority of Americans are smart enough to realize that the best alternative to running off one side of the road is not actually to run off the other side.  

 
 
 
TᵢG
1.1.147  TᵢG  replied to  Jack_TX @1.1.146    one week ago

Well my hope is that most Americans will be critical thinkers.

 
 
 
WallyW
1.2  WallyW  replied to  JohnRussell @1    one week ago

Since Trump will be reelected  and the Repubs will retain the Senate, your point is irrelevant and moot.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.2.1  author  JohnRussell  replied to  WallyW @1.2    one week ago

The article is about 2020 Wally, not something that may or may not happen in 2021. 

 
 
 
Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom
1.2.2  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom  replied to  WallyW @1.2    one week ago
Since Trump will be reelected  and the Repubs will retain the Senate, your point is irrelevant and moot.

The simple fact that you respond indicates that you believe differently.

 
 
 
Texan1211
1.2.3  Texan1211  replied to  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom @1.2.2    one week ago

That is an idiotic conclusion to draw, devoid of facts and substance.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
1.2.4  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Texan1211 @1.2.3    one week ago

No one knows who will be elected so the rule should still stand until after the election.

 
 
 
Texan1211
1.2.5  Texan1211  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @1.2.4    one week ago

Rules change--just ask Democrats about it!

 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.2.6  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Texan1211 @1.2.5    one week ago

It's one thing to change rules originated from the other side, it's another thing entirely to ignore (change) your own rule FROM THE LAST TIME A SUPREME COURT OPENING  CAME UP. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
1.2.7  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @1.2.6    one week ago

I have asked you twice now without a response, so here it is yet once more:

Are Democrats who changed their own rules cheaters and liars like you brand Republicans?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.2.8  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Texan1211 @1.2.7    one week ago

The last time a Supreme Court opening occurred, McConnell expounded on a set of criteria for the nomination. Now, when the NEXT Supreme Court opening could develop, he plans to do a 180 on what he did last time.  Exact same situation. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.2.9  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Texan1211 @1.2.7    one week ago
Are Democrats who changed their own rules cheaters and liars like you brand Republicans?

Feel free to seed relevant examples.  

Since we have to guess what the relevance is to this seed, please stay on topic. If you start your own seed with your tit for tat examples I will comment on it if it is relevant. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
1.2.10  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @1.2.8    one week ago

Way to TOTALLY avoid answering!!!!!!!!!!!!

Great job at deflecting!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
1.2.11  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Texan1211 @1.2.5    one week ago

Ummmm... no. This was established and used by the same person who wants to not use it now. That makes him a hypocrite. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
1.2.12  Texan1211  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @1.2.11    one week ago

Same principle--if a party changes their own rules to benefit themselves, it iS THE SAME THING.

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
1.2.13  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  Texan1211 @1.2.12    one week ago
it iS THE SAME THING.

but when the left does it.... that is different and should not be remembered or brought up.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.2.14  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Texan1211 @1.2.10    one week ago

Texan I have seeded hundreds of articles to NT (probably thousands over 8 years) and written my own articles another couple hundred times.  You do neither. You try, rather feebly, to dog people who say things you dont like. 

If you have examples of Democrats lying about rules please make a seed about it, and we can evaluate the meaning of it. This seed is about Mcconnell. 

 
 
 
bugsy
1.2.15  bugsy  replied to  JohnRussell @1.2.14    one week ago
exan I have seeded hundreds of articles to NT (probably thousands over 8 years) and written my own articles another couple hundred times.

And zero with any proof of any accusations. Only hate.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.2.16  author  JohnRussell  replied to  bugsy @1.2.15    one week ago

Go pester someone else broken record. 

 
 
 
bugsy
1.2.17  bugsy  replied to  JohnRussell @1.2.16    one week ago
broken record. 

Says the guy who "have seeded hundreds of articles to NT (probably thousands over 8 years) and written my own articles another couple hundred times".

 
 
 
Greg Jones
1.2.18  Greg Jones  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @1.2.11    one week ago

This was established and used by the same person who wants to not use it now. That makes him a hypocrite. 

The party in power, in this case in the Senate, can change the rules to their advantage. The Democrats have always done so.

It's perfectly legit and screw the hypocrisy of it.

 
 
 
Texan1211
1.2.19  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @1.2.14    one week ago
If you have examples of Democrats lying about rules please make a seed about it, and we can evaluate the meaning of it. This seed is about Mcconnell. 

I could do your homework for you, but then what would you really learn?

Just in case you forgot (obvious, I know) Democrats changed the rules for confirmation of non-SCOTUS judges and ending debate.

Rules which a Democrat fought for and Democrats passed.

 
 
 
Gulliver-Swift
1.2.20  Gulliver-Swift  replied to  Texan1211 @1.2.7    one week ago
Are Democrats who changed their own rules cheaters and liars like you brand Republicans?

Democrats are mere amateurs compared Republicans when it comes to cheating and lying.

 
 
 
lib50
1.2.21  lib50  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @1.2.13    one week ago
but when the left does it.... that is different and should not be remembered or brought up.

Good grief, the right is currently defending bribery and extortion done with US assets for personal purposes, and it HURT THE USA.  Trump and the entire gop is currently spouting Russian propaganda to benefit Putin.  That would be lies and fake news to put it in your language.  Conservatives are now lying about Ukraine being responsible for something Russia did, and they are saying they don't care if Trump broke the law, they will defend him no matter what.  So they can stuff that hypocrisy.  Wait til a dem decides to use the new republican rules for everything when they get power.  It always comes around.  Always.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.2.22  author  JohnRussell  replied to  bugsy @1.2.17    one week ago

Your comment makes no sense, but let's face it, what else is new? 

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
1.2.23  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  lib50 @1.2.21    one week ago
defending bribery and extortion done with US assets for personal purposes,

none of that is true. except for the people who used the govt to go after trump.

time is running out. so, have fun while it lasts.  

cheers :)

 
 
 
Tessylo
1.2.24  Tessylo  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @1.2.23    one week ago

Time is running out for the 'president' and his corrupt cabinet.  

cheers jrSmiley_82_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Texan1211
1.2.25  Texan1211  replied to  Gulliver-Swift @1.2.20    one week ago

Spectacular deflection.

Now, how's about actually answering what was asked?

 
 
 
TᵢG
1.2.26  TᵢG  replied to  Texan1211 @1.2.25    one week ago

His answer was obvious.   He said 'yes' that Ds lie and cheat, but that they pale in comparison to Rs.

 
 
 
Texan1211
1.2.27  Texan1211  replied to  TᵢG @1.2.26    one week ago
He said 'yes' that Ds lie and cheat, but that they pale in comparison to Rs.

Quote it then where he stated that.

 
 
 
lib50
1.2.28  lib50  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @1.2.23    one week ago

Its all true, and you can just stop the gaslighting.  We are all sick to fricken death of conservatives lying about what Trump said and did.  If they had ANYTHING to prove his position, they would not be blocking every single person from testifying and evidence from being released.  YOU are trying to push the fake news.  That comes straight from Putin.   STOP LYING FOR RUSSIA.

 
 
 
TᵢG
1.2.29  TᵢG  replied to  Texan1211 @1.2.27    one week ago

Read what he wrote @1.2.20

He acknowledged that Ds lie and cheat.   You apparently cannot see that because he noted that, in his opinion, Rs lie and cheat much more.   He essentially called Ds amateur liars and cheaters and implied that Rs are practiced professionals at it.

Do you need him to state this in some specific syntax for you to recognize his answer?

 
 
 
Texan1211
1.2.30  Texan1211  replied to  TᵢG @1.2.29    one week ago

Then you should be able to quote him easily.

 
 
 
TᵢG
1.2.31  TᵢG  replied to  Texan1211 @1.2.30    one week ago

I gave you the link.   All you have to do is read what the man wrote.   Just suppress the urge to read what you want and actually read what he wrote.   This is not complicated.    

Did he write that Ds do not lie and cheat?   (answer:  no)

Did he acknowledge that Ds lie and cheat too but not as much as Rs?  (answer:  yes)

Gulliver @1.2.20Democrats are mere amateurs compared Republicans when it comes to cheating and lying.

What is the point of the faux obtuseness tactic?

 
 
 
lib50
1.2.32  lib50  replied to  TᵢG @1.2.31    one week ago

He lost his bootstraps and wants everybody to do it for him even though he doesn't read it. 

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
1.2.33  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  lib50 @1.2.28    one week ago
Its all true,

nope...

everything you just said is complete bs from end to end.

but you have fun with all that  :)

 
 
 
Freedom Warrior
1.2.34  Freedom Warrior  replied to  JohnRussell @1.2.6    one week ago

let’s just called a democrat rule and everything is fine right

 
 
 
lib50
1.2.35  lib50  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @1.2.33    one week ago

All true, and you are choosing to go the Russian propaganda route with Trump and the rest of the gop.  If Trump had anything to prove he wasn't a corrupt traitor he would have trotted them out by now.  Instead he blocks it all.    The bullshit you keep repeating is easy to recognize, it comes from Trump, who gets it from Putin.  We all see it.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.2.36  author  JohnRussell  replied to  lib50 @1.2.35    one week ago

Trump was asked today why he doesnt let Pompeo , Mulvaney, and Bolton testify.  Trump answered that he would "love" to have those people testify, but the process has been unfair, so he can't. 

Who he kidding?  If they could prove Trump's innocence he would have them shackled to the witness chair in the hearing room for the duration. He would talk about it non-stop. 

But they are silent. Obviously their testimony cannot save him so he is hoping their silence will. 

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
1.2.37  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  lib50 @1.2.35    one week ago
All true, and you are choosing to go

so ya said... LOL

and like I said, enjoy that theory while ya can 

wake me up when trump is removed from office :)

 
 
 
lib50
1.2.38  lib50  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @1.2.37    one week ago

Removal from office is beside the point.  If one party decides it is fine with foreign interference and using the office for personal reasons to the harm of the USA.  Can't make republicans do their jobs, but dems are at least.  Whether he is removed or not,  we are documenting his crimes in office.  It is the right thing to do to stop someone from damaging the country.  Following republican and constitutional procedures.  You find it funny.  Most of us find it sad that Trumpers care more about their power than upholding the laws of the land.  Prof. Karlan ripped Collins a new asshole in her opening statement.  She is us.

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
1.2.39  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  lib50 @1.2.38    6 days ago
Prof. Karlan ripped Collins a new asshole in her opening statement.  She is us.

and gaetz ripped her a new asshole.

she is us?  LOL   try:  epic failure.     

the people are on to the lefts bs, this impeachment sham is only helping trumps re-election chances.

nice try, but no dice.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
2  author  JohnRussell    one week ago
https://lawandcrime.com/supreme-court/ed-whelan-republicans-would-replace-rbg-during-presidential-election-year/

Ed Whelan , a prominent figure in the conservative judicial activism movement, offered a likely preview of Republican strategy in the event that Supreme Court Justice   Ruth Bader Ginsburg   passes away during the 2020 presidential election. In short: Whelan argued that Senate Republicans would quickly move to fill any empty seat.

On Friday, the   New York Times   published a heavily sighed-at column authored by their lead Washington reporter   Carl Hulse : “ Why Republicans Will Sidestep Their Garland Rule for the Court in 2020 .”

The column’s introduction was   repeatedly   panned   on Twitter:

When Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was released from the hospital last weekend after another in a string of health scares, blue America breathed a sigh of relief. Only one more month, many whispered, until the start of a presidential election year when filling a vacancy on the Supreme Court would be off limits in the Senate.

But would it?

The notion that Senate Majority Leader   Mitch McConnell   (R-Ky.) would abide by his own precedent for denying a Supreme Court nominee an up-or-down vote during a presidential election year has always been seen askance–if not outright ridiculed. Liberals, leftists and others who were miffed at McConnell’s denial of a vote for Chief Circuit Judge   Merrick Garland   have long believed the McConnell Doctrine would have a corollary supplied by McConnell himself–should the opportunity of a dead Democrat-appointed justice arise.

McConnell’s critics view the so-called “Garland Rule” as something not entirely unlike ginned up pretext–maybe a source of consternation at best. The premise that Senate Republicans might act with consistency or principles when power beckons is essentially viewed as not worthy of serious consideration by many high court watchers. Nevertheless, the column was written and later shared by Pennsylvania attorney   Howard   Bashman   on Friday afternoon.

The president of the Ethics and Public Policy Center took issue with the Hulse column’s basic thesis–alleging it was actually Democrats who have acted unscrupulously on the subject of filling Supreme Court seats during presidential election years.

“Oh, you mean the *Biden rule* from 1992 (also embraced by Schumer/Reid in 2007 and 2008) that applies only when president and Senate majority are of opposite parties?”   Whelan tweeted .

“Funny how Left (1) concocts claim that Biden rule applies in election years when president and Senate are of *same* party, and (2) forgets its own 2016 argument (bonkers, to be sure) that Senate is constitutionally obligated to hold an up-or-down vote on a #SCOTUS nominee,” Whelan later added.

The so-called “Biden rule” refers to comments made by then-senator   Joe Biden   in 1992 during a floor speech in which he implored then-president   George H.W. Bush   to delay a hypothetical Supreme Court vacancy “that would occur in the full throes of an election year.”

“Some will criticize such a decision and say that it was nothing more than an attempt to save a seat on the court in hopes that a Democrat will be permitted to fill it, but that would not be our intention,” Biden said. “It would be our pragmatic conclusion that once the political season is underway, and it is, action on a Supreme Court nomination must be put off until after the election campaign is over.”

Invocation of Biden’s words were used by Senate Republicans to throttle the Garland candidacy in its infancy.   Biden himself weakly protested   that his floor speech was taken out of context and noted how he had also floated the idea of a “moderate” compromise candidate being named under such circumstances.

Whelan is largely known for his conspiracy theory   that   Christine Blasey Ford   had mistakenly identified   Brett Kavanaugh   as the man who sexually assaulted her in 1982.

Though much-derided at the time due to Whelan’s use of Zillow home listings to attempt to prove his case, the “mistaken identity” theory   was eventually adopted in lesser form by many of Kavanaugh’s defenders   who were loathe to call Ford a liar.

President   Donald Trump   himself endorsed the Whelan-sourced theory. As did Senators   Susan Collins   (R-Maine),   Lindsey Graham   (R-S.C.) and   Joe Manchin   (D-W.Va.).

As such, Whelan’s posture on a potential open Supreme Court seat offers a window into the heart of elite GOP thinking on the matte
 
 
 
Ronin2
2.1  Ronin2  replied to  JohnRussell @2    one week ago

So?

The Democrats would do the exact same damn thing if it was a Democratic President, and they controlled the Senate.

Please stop pretending they wouldn't.

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
2.1.1  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  Ronin2 @2.1    one week ago
The Democrats would do the exact same damn thing if it was a Democratic President, and they controlled the Senate.

they would do exactly that in a heartbeat.

 
 
 
1stwarrior
3  1stwarrior    one week ago

https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/11/supreme-court-term-limits-have-bipartisan-support/

Totally concur that we should have term limits on the SCOTUS justices - and, we should also have them for our Congressional folks.

Get the old blood out and the new blood and ideas in.  We're growing stagnant with the same arguments over and over and over and over.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
3.1  author  JohnRussell  replied to  1stwarrior @3    one week ago

Your comment is not related to the topic of the article. 

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
3.2  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  1stwarrior @3    one week ago
We're growing stagnant with the same arguments over and over and over and over.

the country is not growing stagnant. progressives are.

our republic was designed to be a pain in the ass like that. see: long term stability.

if every generation got to change the legal fabric of our nation it would become a shit-hole almost overnight.

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
4  The Magic Eight Ball    one week ago
and confirm such a nominee as would be presented to them by Trump?

how can trump make an appointment?

I thought trump was going to be removed from office any day now.

c'est la vie :)

 
 
 
JohnRussell
4.1  author  JohnRussell  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @4    one week ago

Another comment divorced from the points made in the article and the first comment. 

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
4.1.1  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  JohnRussell @4.1    one week ago

divorced from the point?  LOL

ya say trump will be removed any day now. and yet ya say trump could appoint a new justice to the bench next year?  how is that even possible? (rhetorical) 

I guess there is nothing to this impeachment thing after all.  my bad yo.

cheers :)

 
 
 
Greg Jones
4.1.2  Greg Jones  replied to  JohnRussell @4.1    one week ago

You can't refute what we are saying. Quit trying to hide behind the "not on topic" excuse because what you state doesn't inspire echo chamber participation.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
4.1.3  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Greg Jones @4.1.2    one week ago

Please, no senseless babbling on my articles. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
4.2  Texan1211  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @4    one week ago

LOL.

That's a good point.

 
 
 
Dean Moriarty
5  Dean Moriarty    one week ago

Yep it's probably going to happen and conservatives will rejoice. Just one more reason I'm glad Trump won.  

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5.1  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Dean Moriarty @5    one week ago

So, to be clear, you agree that McConnell should simply ignore the precedent he himself set for these things just 3 1/2 years ago? 

Why was it ok for the voters to have a say in 2016 but not in 2020? 

If it happens ( an opening on the Supreme Court) in 2020 it will be the exact same circumstance as 2016 and garland.  (McConnells assertion that it is different because the president is a Republican now is nonsensical)

 
 
 
Texan1211
5.1.1  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1    one week ago

Look on the bright side, JR, at least then you would have something new to kvetch about!

 
 
 
Dean Moriarty
5.1.2  Dean Moriarty  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1    one week ago

It was a gamble by McConnell that turned out to be a brilliant strategic move. Many Dems said it would cost the Republicans at the polls but it helped result in their strongest position in seventy years. 

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
5.1.3  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1    one week ago
Why was it ok for the voters to have a say in 2016 but not in 2020? 

to be clear...

when we said we will be taking our country back from progressives. 

we never said we would ask their permission.

the left has changed enough rules... now it is our turn.

that said... relax. odds are ginsburg will probably last another year.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5.1.4  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Dean Moriarty @5.1.2    one week ago

So you approve of the Senate Majority leader being a bald faced liar ABOUT senate procedure. (which is not a political matter). 

 
 
 
Dean Moriarty
5.1.5  Dean Moriarty  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.4    one week ago

No he should just use the Obama move and say his views have evolved. 

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
5.1.6  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  Dean Moriarty @5.1.5    one week ago
the Obama move and say his views have evolved

yepp :)

 
 
 
Texan1211
6  Texan1211    one week ago

Democrats aren't seriously whining about rules changes, are they?

LMFAO!

 
 
 
JohnRussell
7  author  JohnRussell    one week ago

I have to say, I usually have low expectations for the Trumpers on this site, but they are exceeding  ( going lower) my expectations on this article !

 
 
 
Tessylo
7.1  Tessylo  replied to  JohnRussell @7    one week ago

[Deleted]

 
 
 
JohnRussell
8  author  JohnRussell    one week ago

The responses from conservatives on this seed are a good example of why we are at "war" with these people and must realize there is no hope of being 'reasonable' with them. 

Virtually every right winger who has replied to this seed has openly proclaimed that they see nothing wrong with McConnell doing a 180 on how Merrick Garland was treated and putting through a Trump appointee in direct opposition to what was done in 2016. 

You can't "reason" with such people, you have to beat them. 

I wonder when our moderates and independents will realize this. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
8.1  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @8    one week ago

Seems to upset you.

That is sad.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
8.1.1  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Texan1211 @8.1    one week ago

To the contrary, I am the most open eyed person here.  I was saying over 4 - 5 years ago that Trump supporters were a bigger problem and threat to our country than the moron Trump himself. 

I think that has proven to be utterly true. 

The cult has grown stronger, not in numbers but in obedience to Trump. It has been a disaster and a tragedy for the United States. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
8.1.2  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @8.1.1    one week ago

Don't you all ever tire of your Chicken Little routines?

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
8.1.3  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  JohnRussell @8.1.1    one week ago
The cult has grown stronger, not in numbers but in obedience to Trump

trump is not our leader, he is our representative and he is only doing what we voted for him to do.  "put the political boot to progressive ass"

and yes, support for trump has grown substantially.

 
 
 
bugsy
8.1.4  bugsy  replied to  Texan1211 @8.1    one week ago
That is sad.

Not to me. Makes me happy.

 
 
 
Greg Jones
8.1.5  Greg Jones  replied to  JohnRussell @8.1.1    one week ago

That's a ginormous cult, over 63,000,000 and growing.

 
 
 
Goodtime Charlie
8.1.6  Goodtime Charlie  replied to  JohnRussell @8.1.1    one week ago
I am the most open eyed person here

jrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Freedom Warrior
8.1.7  Freedom Warrior  replied to  JohnRussell @8.1.1    one week ago

You’re the wind beneath my wings JR.

 
 
 
Greg Jones
8.2  Greg Jones  replied to  JohnRussell @8    one week ago

You can't "reason" with such people, you have to beat them.

Even the moderates and independents don't agree with your views and won't help the Dems come election time.

You simply can't beat "us" because the good people of this country reject what the left is currently offering.

 
 
 
Tacos!
9  Tacos!    one week ago
The McConnell-Ginsburg Rule?

I think they mean the Biden Rule. Welcome to D.C.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
9.1  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Tacos! @9    one week ago

You dont understand the "Biden rule".  The "Biden rule", if it exists, would argue against a Supreme Court nomination in 2020. 

 
 
 
Tacos!
9.1.1  Tacos!  replied to  JohnRussell @9.1    one week ago

I'm not following you as to what you think I'm missing. Can you expand and clarify your remarks?

 
 
 
MrFrost
9.2  MrFrost  replied to  Tacos! @9    one week ago

I think they mean the Biden Rule. Welcome to D.C.

Who was up for nomination when this, "Biden Rule" was used? 

No one. 

 
 
 
Tacos!
9.2.1  Tacos!  replied to  MrFrost @9.2    one week ago
Who was up for nomination when this, "Biden Rule" was used?  No one. 

What’s in a peanut butter and jelly sandwich?

Peanut Butter and Jelly (and bread of course).

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
10  Sean Treacy    one week ago

No one has any "honor" on this position.   The last two times Democrats controlled the Senate with a Republican President in an election year, the Democratic leadership publicly announced  Democrats wouldn't confirm a Republican Supreme Court candidate during an election year. 

But Democrats were more than willing to ignore their stated "rule" and confirm Merrick Garland in 2016.  It's all about votes. The same people allegedly so concerned with "honor and "honesty" were more than happy to see Democrats  go ahead and confirm a nominee despite their recent promises to block nominees in an election year.

Let's say Republicans honor the Biden rule in 2020 and Trump loses.

What person believes the democrats would leave a seat (say Clarence Thomas) in 2024 open if they control the Presidency and the Senate? 

Any party will confirm a Justice if they can. To believe otherwise is to be a gullible fool.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
10.2  author  JohnRussell  replied to  Sean Treacy @10    one week ago

Sean, at least you addressed the topic. 

MITCH MC CONNELL is the very person who declared that the American voter should have their say in an election year. That was HIS rationale. This particular situation isnt about the Democrats, it is about him possibly opposing his own on the record position on approving SC justices in presidential election years.  According to news accounts, his rationale will be that the president is now of the same party as the Senate, so 2020 would be a different situation than 2016. 

But his stated reason in 2016 was that the VOTER should decide who they want to nominate the next SC justice. It had nothing to do with what party the senate or president were. He says that now because it is his only way out. 

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
10.2.1  Sean Treacy  replied to  JohnRussell @10.2    one week ago
. T. That was HIS rationale. This particular situation isnt about the Democrats, 

Of course it is.  The rationale is as much Biden and Schumer's as it is McConnell's.  I take them at their word that they would have killed any nominee either Bush had nominated in similar circumstances. The difference is the media doesn't hold Democrats to their previous  positions or even acknowledge they exist , but they hold Republicans to a different standard.  

It's all about the politics of the moment. If there are 50 Republicans who want to confirm, they will. If there's not, they won't.  Joe Biden isn't going to follow the Biden rule in 2024, nor would any any Democrat whenever chance may have them controlling the Presidency and the Senate.  Just imagine what Democrats would do if they did.  

No majority party  is going to  refuse to confirm a Supreme Court nominee given the chance, in part because they know that's how the other party would act and that the political price of not confirming is worse than voting to confirm.  

 
 
 
Texan1211
12  Texan1211    one week ago

Why are people having apoplectic fits over something that merely MIGHT happen?

 
 
 
dennis smith
12.1  dennis smith  replied to  Texan1211 @12    one week ago

For good or bad, John often uses speculation, what if, it might, probably, maybe etc, etc. 

 
 
 
Tacos!
12.2  Tacos!  replied to  Texan1211 @12    one week ago

It's been going on since before Trump was even elected, and apparently, it's never going to stop.

 
 
 
Steve Ott
13  Steve Ott    one week ago

The article is speculation, so let's speculate.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) on Monday vowed to be the "Grim Reaper" for progressive policies if Republicans hold on to the Senate in 2020.

Now, while he says "if" Republicans hold on to 2020, I fully expect he would do all he can to insure that will happen. And if it looks like they may not hold the Senate, I fully expect he would ignore his own "rule" and force someone through.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
14  Buzz of the Orient    one week ago

If this situation arises, i.e. Ginsburg is gone during the next year, Trump should fool the Democrats and nominate a brilliant liberal jurist who votes Democrat to the SCOTUS - Dershowitz.

 
 
 
Tacos!
14.1  Tacos!  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @14    one week ago

Excellent choice! jrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
bbl-1
14.2  bbl-1  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @14    one week ago

Exhuming Roland Freisler would be the best Trumpian choice.

 
 
 
Tessylo
14.3  Tessylo  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @14    one week ago

I don't think so.  The pedophile kiddy raping Dershowitz!

No fucking way.  

Dershowitz, a liberal?

jrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
14.3.1  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Tessylo @14.3    one week ago

He has been viciously and falsely accused of it, has effectively defended himself about it, and I and anyone with any brains in their head would not believe the lying little bitch AND her lawyer.. 

 
 
 
Tessylo
14.3.2  Tessylo  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @14.3.1    one week ago

He's a kiddy fucker and certainly no liberal.  

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
14.3.3  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Tessylo @14.3.2    one week ago

Well, as I just said.......

 
 
 
Raven Wing
15  Raven Wing    one week ago

I would never be so foolish as to count Ms. Ginsburg out any time soon as so many seem to be anxious to do. It is a bigger bet that she will see both the Turtle Man and Trump out the door before she does.

 
 
 
Dean Moriarty
15.1  Dean Moriarty  replied to  Raven Wing @15    one week ago

She was just recently released from the hospital again. She’s had four battles with cancer including lung and pancreatic cancer. 
https://www.webmd.com/healthy-aging/news/20191125/ruth-bader-ginsburg-released-from-hospital-after-health-scare#1

 
 
 
Raven Wing
15.1.1  Raven Wing  replied to  Dean Moriarty @15.1    one week ago

So? Are you her physician? Do you know her overall health? Or are you pretending to be the Grim Reaper? 

What she has gone through does not mean she is already in the grave. 

However, continue to keep your morbid outlook. Iam sure that Ms Ginsburg does not let it bother her in the least. 

 
 
 
Dean Moriarty
15.1.2  Dean Moriarty  replied to  Raven Wing @15.1.1    one week ago

The answer to all of those ridiculous questions is no. I’m simply reporting the facts. 

 
 
 
Freedom Warrior
15.1.3  Freedom Warrior  replied to  Raven Wing @15.1.1    one week ago

she looks to me like she staring down the barrel of her mortality 

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online

Texan1211
Dismayed Patriot
MUVA
Sunshine
JohnRussell
Nerm_L
jungkonservativ111
Old Hermit
Krishna


29 visitors