Random Politics & Religion #22

Washington Post brought to you by Amazon.com act now and get free shipping !

The real news is that we are on page 3 and Donny is missing in action.

I just read a long piece that went deep into that faith concept.

Donald Trump’s Fictional America

I grew up surrounded by Chávez’s alternate reality. Now I’m watching one consume the United States.
Politico Magazine

I still can't understand this. Give in now so the GOP gets what they want, so they can use the nuclear option if it comes up again. Or force them to use it now, so they get what they want and can get what they want in the future. Same basic outcome, so why not force them to sink the filibuster right now.

The author did not defined what reality is. So it seems like this guy is living in an alternative reality.

There are multiple reasons why it's a stupid idea. It's one thing to stage an opposition protest to a Betsy DeVos type, where nobody can really blame you. It's an entirely different thing to stage a protest to the most agreeable judge Trump could possibly pick, with a nearly impeccable record to boot. It makes you look petty, and completely invalidates your objections to the Republican obstructionism of years past.

Another reason is that while the Senate can basically launch the nuclear option at any point, having it active serves as a protective veil against more extreme options. And let's use DeVos as an option again. If Reid hadn't changed the rules before, do you really believe that Republicans would have gone nuclear to get someone like her in? Absolutely not. She would have been blocked, and you'd have someone else in her spot right now. The same goes with the Supreme Court. With the filibuster gone, Trump can pick a party-line hyper-conservative to fill the next spot without even the pretense of caring about bipartisan support.

Another fun fact, Amway is owned by the DeVos family and is involved in that intriguing communication 3 way involving Trump servers, Alfa Bank in Russia and Amway.

These dots, are they claimed to be mutually exclusive? Cause when start connecting...

Yeah, I can't believe that powerful people would have family members that are also powerful, and that they would have connections with other powerful people. It's extra suspicious when it's a Republican and we're predisposed to be suspicious of them anyway.

Then why did the GOP even refuse to give Garland even a hearing?

I mean they slapped the president in the face with a 2 week dead flounder. And the Democrats will not forget it.

And if the GOP uses the nuclear option it energizes the dems base. And they REALLY need to turn their base out in mid term elections.

Oh the Democrats I'm so scared. Please protect me from them.

Look he is going to be on the Supreme Court and there isn't a damned thing you can do about it.

The GOP should have given Garland a hearing at the very least... even though the precedent of not allowing a justice through in an election year was set by none other than Joe Biden. And the nuclear option likewise does not motivate the Dem base, because they know it's just an extension of what Harry Reid did. If Democrats want a real weapon against Republicans, they should try not opening the door to these sleazebag tactics in the first place.

Not sure what I make of the GOP going nuclear on the SCOTUS nomination.

Sure they have a right to get things rolling but that the GOP didn't even have a hearing for the previous administration's choice yet they're pushing this through, damned the consequences. It doesn't sit entirely right with me. I guess that's me just looking in from the outside though.

Bipartisanship is well and truly dead.
What was the time of death, anyone?

Joe Biden making a comment that had no impact on the Supreme Court does not set any precedent. There was no precedent for blocking Garland.

Did anyone object to Biden's suggestion on the Democrat side when he made the comment? Oh yeah, they thought it was a great idea... until it bit them. It's just the same old hypocritical partisan nonsense.

If it makes you feel any better, if Garland had gone to vote he wouldn't have passed anyway.

I don't have the '92 transcript. It was a hypothetical situation, completely different than the real world.

Who cares about Garland you guys are living in the past.

That time that Democrats didn't block a supreme court nomination is just like that time that Republicans did block a nomination.

It was not. Not going to do the research on that currently but that was falsified almost the moment turtleman said it.

If you are unhappy about the nominee get off your *** and go to law school. Do something about it bitching after he gets appointed isn't productive.

Tuesday, January 20, 2009.

It's funny how that flippant response is applicable both ways

Obama mania yea I remember people crying in the streets cause the savoir was elected.

That would make sense up until this past Friday when the bar association was removed from the vetting process.

Fone, I ran away from law school. I come from a large extended Jewish family just chock full of Jewish lawyers.

While bitching isn't productive, it feels good. And takes less effort than voting.

A Jewish lawyer such a thing is a myth surely !

I try my best to be a stereotypical white male. It's hard our numbers are dwindling. This diversity thing seems to be taking off...

Funny how no Democrats have a problem with what Biden proposed, but they make extra sure to condemn Republicans for actually doing it.

Yep, funny how hypotheticals are different from the real world.

Yeah, kinda like how Trump's Muslim ban has never been proposed, but we have to make sure he can't enforce national security anyway.