kapkomet Posted May 24, 2005 Share Posted May 24, 2005 So they reached a deal to only filibuster under "extraordinary circumstances" judicial nominees. I'll bet my next paycheck the next "extraordinary cirumstance" is when Renqhuist retires, and that is a f***ing shame, because this was all a show. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LowerCaseRepublican Posted May 24, 2005 Share Posted May 24, 2005 QUOTE(kapkomet @ May 23, 2005 -> 06:23 PM) So they reached a deal to only filibuster under "extraordinary circumstances" judicial nominees. I'll bet my next paycheck the next "extraordinary cirumstance" is when Renqhuist retires, and that is a f***ing shame, because this was all a show. When 280 of Bush's nominees get voted on and only 10 don't (I was watching C-SPAN earlier haha), I think the Republican whining regarding the filibuster lack of voting seems moot. Especially when Bush's percentage of approvals regarding judicial nominees is about the same if not better than previous presidents. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benchwarmerjim Posted May 24, 2005 Share Posted May 24, 2005 I am waiting for the extremes of each party start to attack the 'moderates' who made this deal. Especially on the Republican side with the Pat Robertsons of the world really want to shake up the judicary, and who seem to have taken over the Republican party. But I guess that whole angle is for a different thread. hahah. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvilMonkey Posted May 24, 2005 Share Posted May 24, 2005 QUOTE(LowerCaseRepublican @ May 24, 2005 -> 12:30 AM) When 280 of Bush's nominees get voted on and only 10 don't (I was watching C-SPAN earlier haha), I think the Republican whining regarding the filibuster lack of voting seems moot. Especially when Bush's percentage of approvals regarding judicial nominees is about the same if not better than previous presidents. It is not the amount of judges that don't get confirmed, it is for what position that they don't get confirmed. The Dems are simply holding out on anyone for any position that they consider to be a stepping stone to the Supreme Court. You of all people here should know that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LowerCaseRepublican Posted May 24, 2005 Share Posted May 24, 2005 QUOTE(EvilMonkey @ May 23, 2005 -> 07:00 PM) It is not the amount of judges that don't get confirmed, it is for what position that they don't get confirmed. The Dems are simply holding out on anyone for any position that they consider to be a stepping stone to the Supreme Court. You of all people here should know that. Its all the same pithy stuff that each party does whenever they aren't in power. Doesn't make it right but its all it is. My favorite has been Santorum and Novak trying to interject allusions to Democrats being like Hitler and the SS during their debates about the filibuster. That's provided a ton of comedic relief to the insanity of American politics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvilMonkey Posted May 24, 2005 Share Posted May 24, 2005 QUOTE(LowerCaseRepublican @ May 24, 2005 -> 01:53 AM) Its all the same pithy stuff that each party does whenever they aren't in power. Doesn't make it right but its all it is. My favorite has been Santorum and Novak trying to interject allusions to Democrats being like Hitler and the SS during their debates about the filibuster. That's provided a ton of comedic relief to the insanity of American politics. Hey, if Bush = Hitler, so can Democrats. You are right, both parties do it, but you seemed to leave that out the first time. I am sure I have left it off before as well. Maybe we could both get jobs at newsweek? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LowerCaseRepublican Posted May 24, 2005 Share Posted May 24, 2005 QUOTE(EvilMonkey @ May 23, 2005 -> 09:52 PM) Hey, if Bush = Hitler, so can Democrats. You are right, both parties do it, but you seemed to leave that out the first time. I am sure I have left it off before as well. Maybe we could both get jobs at newsweek? Haha, gimme Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich and lets just re-start with 433 new members of Congress. I choose Paul and Kucinich because they seem to be the least corporately corrupt sonsofb****es in government. Plus, that way it'd be bi-partisan (Paul is a Republican from Texas and Kucinich is a Democrat from Ohio but oddly enough, they both agree on a lot of the same issues so things have a prospect of getting done) Anything would be better than Dr. Bill "I have a degree in medicine but I can't give a straight answer about whether I believe tears & sweat transmitting AIDS is true because if I say its BS, I'll be slaughtered by the abstinence only Christian right" Frist and the rest of the whores. To quote Jon Stewart, "I want to cry...but I don't want to put a condom on my face." And an aside if you want to read about the bi-partisan f***ing of this country, check out "Pigs at the Trough" and "Perfectly Legal". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted May 24, 2005 Share Posted May 24, 2005 I never thought I'd ever say it, but big ups to the Senator from South Carolina, Lindsey Graham. I'm pleased as punch that this happened today. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.