They talkin’ about The Reid Option? They’ll get over it.
Cool. Long live the Republic!
Trump needs to rescind JFK’s executive order allowing public unions...
They expect that "serious debate" to begin with a declaration that Democrats get whatever they want, and then end.
What did they say when Harry Reid did it?
“””””””“Last year I stood outside the Supreme Court with hundreds of others asking our elected representatives to ‘Do their job,’ and now it’s safe to say they have let us all down. It’s unfortunate that faced with the idea of having to put forth a new and better nominee for all of America, Senate leaders have instead run roughshod over long-established rules and guidelines so they could get their way.””””””””””””
Yeah, that’s the cool thing about winning an election, you get to choose your own judges.
I suppose, with all their hand wringing over its removal, that the Democrats will reinstate this filibuster rule if/when they ever take control of the Senate back right?
Sure.
I always love to ask this question of liberals when they bring up the Garland nomination: Since the senate found the nominee to not even be worth holding hearings over, why didn’t the president withdraw the nomination and nominate someone whom the senate might approve of?
How did it go a year of ‘accept my nominee or I’ll leave the seat vacant’? Why were they never angry at Obama for not putting forward another nominee?
To the democrats who say that ‘now SCOTUS nominees are nothing more than political appointees’, I always ask which of Obama’s SCOTUS nominees were anything more than political appointments? I mean, those were the most transparently political appointees that Obama nominated, none of which would stand up to half of Gorsuch’s record.
And if they’re really that upset about laws created by SCOTUS disappearing, why haven’t they taken steps to encourage their party members to return the power of making laws to the only body that constitutionally can do so?
Oh, right, because the voters might take it out on them..
Democracy is always something they support, so long as it is for something they support. Democracy (50+1) for something they don’t support is of course ‘chilling.’
Sad day was when Fed employees were allowed to unionize. Shoulda never happened. they forgot who they work for!!!
They did and you're still not happy.
You are a union.
A government union.
Unions have problems, but have some use.
Government unions, and their members. should be shot, hung, burned, and buried in the sun.
FU, AFGE. Now, in the future, and forever. Rinse, repeat.
Yeah, all the way back to 2003 when partisan democRats started this "tradition".
It’s a sad day for democracy...
But a pretty good day or the Republic.
The Leftists love to talk about “democracy”, but they claim that this is bad for democracy. Last I checked, democracy means that 51% rules the 49%.
Which is why we are not a democracy. But they wouldn’t understand that.
Funny, I don’t recall this or any other union saying a dang thing when the 60-vote rules was instituted in 2003 to block George W from putting judges on the federal bench.
All we’ve done is returned to the original intent of Congress. And is it any wonder that the very first “filibuster” was by a Dimocrat?
Makes you question Scalias death even more doesn’t it?
McConnell didn’t change the rules, he just put them back as they were for over 200 years. Great day for the Constitution.
The socialists finally lost one.
That's because one doesn't exist here.
We are a Constitutional Representative Republic.
It was a great day for a Constitutional Representative Republic.
Do any of these idiots know our Pledge of Allegiance?
I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
You hypocrites!
In virtually the same breath you lament the "sad day for democracy" while stating "Forcing through a justice by a simple majority vote shows that leaders in the Senate don’t care about the working class."
You dolts! Passage by virtue of a simple majority is the very essence of democracy - and the reason why the Founders favored a Constitutional Republic instead. You're only mad because you failed to get what you wanted - not because of any abandonment of "long-established rules and guidelines". Invoking the Reid rule became a necessity when dhimmicrats promised to derail the advise and consent process. And please don't lie about the nomination process becoming a political one - the left created the partisan environment long before Gorsuch. Remember Bork?
I'm elated to see that you're angry about yet another loss for the left - because that loss means a win for America! Regards,
An American Taxpayer
Where was this jackazz while Husseincare was being written in secret meetings?