The judicial nomination war started with Bork. Let’s end it with Gorsuch.

I agree with James Robertson in this excellent op ed piece in the Washington Post.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...-card-d:homepage/story&utm_term=.f5da6b066172


I hope the Dems do not do a Bork on Judge Gorsuch...and that the man gets confirmed across party lines. Doing so will be for the good of the Republic.

 

The only way to stop is for the Democrats to stop it, they started the practice it is up to them to call for a halt to it. Same for the Cabinet nominees, want to go back to a supermajority to consent, the next time the Democrats control the Senate then they need to call for the halt.

 

You reckon if they do, the Republican won't unconstitutionally hold up appointments under the next Democratic president?

I call that fantasy.

 

No. They will do it constitutionally. Why wouldn't they?

 

I agree, Gorsuch should get near unanimous approval....for the next opening because this one needs to go to Garland

 

You figure the original intent of the founders when they said "advice and consent" then meant that the Senate could put it off for years?

Odd position for a conservative to take.

 

Good point, if the Senators really want to do what is best for the country, they'd respect the intent of the Constitution and approve Obama's nominee.

 

You are so right.

 

That's not what Biden said when he blocked a nomination.

 

Biden's in the Senate?

 

Yah? Who's nomination did he block?

 

Attempted to block Scalia. It failed, but you aren't trying to suggest that Biden would change his impassioned beliefs based on such a small setback? He is a man of principal!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...d10062cc82d_story.html?utm_term=.ad1825ef792a

 

Is this what Rush is telling you?

Scalia was appointed in 1986 and there was no attempt by Biden to block him.

 

I figure they will do it Constitutionally and asked why wouldn't they?

 

The Senate is under no obligation to confirm the President's nominee.

The Senate is under no obligation to vote for cloture such that a vote on the President's nominee can occur.

__________________________

****, sorry mate. I forgot that my side of politics is in power. Take back everything I just said, the Senate must immediately have a vote or be censured by SCOTUS for not serving the President.

 

Why did you cut off my post and dodge my question?

 

Because I don't care what you figger, this is about borking Gorsuch and you didn't answer my question.

 

I didn't say what I figured, I asked you what you figured.

The fact that you had to dodge my question is all the answer needed.

 

He made those comments in 92, Scalia was confirmed in 86....98-0 was the vote

 

I think the Republicans may very well continue to take the low road.

I just don't think everyone should be on that low road just because they love it so.

 

I answered ypur question you didn't answer mine.

So are you going to dodge and divert or deal with the subject here?

 

I hope they try.

 

No, I answered your question you didn't answer mine.

The reason is obvious.

 

Yeah. That didn't happen.

 

I'd agree. Our intention is to get Gorsuch seated...and then make the Senate in 2018 filibuster proof so that Democrats don't have a say on the matter. One Party rule the only solution to the Left's current un-American traitorous behavior.