Welcome Guest

No, because dems wouldn't let bush nominate either.

Posted on: April 4, 2017 at 10:44:20 CT

RHAYWORTH MU

Posts:

47415

Member For:

16.76 yrs

Level:

User

M.O.B. Votes:

They decided that a president shouldn't nominate a supreme in their last year of presidency.

So, they screwed bush over.

And acted butthurt when republicans did the same to Obama.

Please explain why this message is being reported.

REPLY

MESSAGE THREAD

Let's try this again - Sal KC - 4/4 09:56:42

Pro Corp, Anti-Labor, Anti-Little Guy - raskolnikov MU - 4/4 10:20:17

You're anti-labor and anti-little guy - pickle MU

- 4/4 10:48:09

Doesn't mean the Justice should be - raskolnikov MU - 4/4 10:55:03

Rask, you're an idiot (nm) - pickle MU

- 4/4 12:14:14

He's not - MrBlueSky MU - 4/4 10:16:04

there is no argument against him - cnk ATL - 4/4 10:12:18

There is none - El-ahrairah KC - 4/4 10:04:17

Outside of being unprecendently partisan - 4TigersinMichigan MU - 4/4 10:00:32

Always funny when a hypocrite rails against hypocrisy - JG MU

- 4/4 10:24:36

It may be the end of the US Senate - raskolnikov MU - 4/4 10:23:52

Just one more huge tactical mistake by Dems - 615Tiger STL - 4/4 10:18:34

Unprecedented??? - pickle MU

- 4/4 10:07:50

Name me another time this has happened - 4TigersinMichigan MU - 4/4 10:13:41

Merrick Garland - MrBlueSky MU - 4/4 10:18:27

Didnt garland get sat on - El-ahrairah KC - 4/4 10:15:18

No. - Spanky KU - 4/4 10:27:28

RE: Didnt garland get sat on - Silas MU - 4/4 10:17:01

Yes it is. Never happen before. - Coors4bob MU - 4/4 10:10:03

What is the case for Gorsuch? - Silas MU - 4/4 09:58:21

I will answer. Long term judge that follows the law - tman KC - 4/4 10:13:16

10,000 others out there also qualified. Why him? - Silas MU - 4/4 10:27:15

That's not the question I asked - Sal KC - 4/4 10:08:27

Because you asked the second question. Not the first. - Silas MU - 4/4 10:15:01

Then why don't the Democrats want to vote yes or no? - Salty Dog MU

- 4/4 10:16:41

Why do Republicans want the votes from Democrats? Besides - Silas MU - 4/4 10:18:47

O...M...G.... Are you truly this misinformed?? DOH! - Salty Dog MU

- 4/4 10:26:39

If it doesn't need 60, why the discussion? - Silas MU - 4/4 10:28:33

Perhaps you could educate yourself so you aren't so... - Salty Dog MU

- 4/4 10:30:35

The same case Democrats voted unanimously for in 2006... - Salty Dog MU

- 4/4 10:04:18

US District Judge, right? - Silas MU - 4/4 10:05:52

You need to explain that more. It's clearly, relevant. - RHAYWORTH MU - 4/4 10:08:21

If he was so flawed why did Democrats vote unanimously? (nm) - Salty Dog MU

- 4/4 10:07:05

US District Judge, right? - Silas MU - 4/4 10:08:21

You don't know? - Salty Dog MU

- 4/4 10:11:14

You don't get it, do you? Why am I not surprised? - Silas MU - 4/4 10:13:11

It's obviously you that doesn't get it (nm) - Salty Dog MU

- 4/4 10:15:35

By every measure and account used historically - 4TigersinMichigan MU - 4/4 10:01:18

So are about 10,000 other attorneys. So why him? - Silas MU - 4/4 10:04:45

Read his resume. It is very special. - Coors4bob MU - 4/4 10:09:08

Because he is the one the president nominated - 4TigersinMichigan MU - 4/4 10:06:49

Garland was nominated - Silas MU - 4/4 10:19:42

No, because dems wouldn't let bush nominate either. - RHAYWORTH MU - 4/4 10:44:20

Time was too short so they didn't get to it (nm) - Salty Dog MU

- 4/4 10:39:51

Because that is who the POTUS wants... - Salty Dog MU

- 4/4 10:06:18

If POTUS wants to pull the plug in veterans benefits, we go - Silas MU - 4/4 10:07:20

Whatever you think, Scooter... (nm) - Salty Dog MU

- 4/4 10:07:49