No shit. They ran the last election cycle as REPEAL AND REPLACE!!!!!!! The public said "OK, fucking do it!" Now everyone is acting shocked that they need to have a plan that isn't just watered down Obamacare. What are you doing here? There should have been a plan in place for the last year that was all negotiated and ready to roll out. You cant keep saying the other side's plan is shit if you don't have a plan to counter with. That's not governance, that's just bitching.

_________________

They voted about 60 times in Obama's two terms in office to repeal Obamacare, and they had no plan to replace it the entire time. Why do you think they would have a plan now?

_________________

He got his third choice through. The whole process started in mid 1987. I think if Garland was nominated in June of 2015, people would have rightfully crucified the Republicans for obstructing that long. The only reason it hit in 1988 was because he had to go through three candidates. The Democrats fought hard on this one and I think in the end made Reagan pick a decent guy. Kennedy is certainly right leaning but he has ended up being a swing vote for liberals as well.

_________________

That's typical politics though. If they had proposed specifics, most voters would have seen there was either no difference or would make the situation even worse. Better to offer their vague version of "hope and change" and then deal with it once they get into office...and let's face it, many probably didn't think Trump had a chance to win anyway so it was probably not a priority to work on a comprehensive plan that would be DOA.

_________________

Gorsuch made Feinstein look like a blundering idiot when she tried to play gotcha with questions about Heller. Gorsuch was asked for his opinion on the matter, whether he agrees with Scalia and such and he essentially said it doesn't matter whether he agrees or not, it's currently the law and he will uphold the law even if he does not agree with it on a personal level.

_________________
"Play until it hurts, then play until it hurts to not play."
http://soundcloud.com/darkside124 HOF 2013, MM Champion 2014

Yeah that was good.

He said exactly that. It was great.

_________________

Blind Trump hater? Oh, brother. Another attempt to shout me down. Weak.

My statement had nothing to do with Trump or Gorsuch. It was Obama's nomination, period. Orrin Hatch and others said that Obama wouldn't pick somebody as moderate as Garland. Well, he did, and they wouldn't even hear it.

_________________
Good people drink good beer - Hunter S. Thompson

<º)))><

Waiting for the time when I can finally say
That this has all been wonderful, but now I'm on my way

I don't think Hank was talking about you specifically.

_________________

It wasn't a shot at you specifically. I'm just pointing out that people hating on Gorsuch are really just doing so because they hate Trump. That's fine if that's the angle that they want to play but its a bad look. And as I pointed out, historically, presidents just do not nominate a justice in their final year. I didn't dislike Garland, would have been an OK pick. Just like Gorsuch is an OK pick. I wish Obama had originally picked Garland instead of his previous choices.

_________________

Please define as how it was an attempt to shout someone down. If the only argument to why Gorsuch shouldn't be nominated is that "Obama should have been allowed to pick Scalia's replacement", we are going to have an empty SCOTUS in another 25 years because that ship has already sailed.

_________________

Now we get to the truth of the matter. Hank Scorpio hates women.

_________________

This is all well and good. Just pointing out that passing this off as though it's just another confirmation is severely understating the importance of the situation.

Dismissing somebody as a blind Trump hater is shouting somebody down. But, you said you weren't talking to me, so I guess you weren't shouting me down. Let's move on.

_________________
Good people drink good beer - Hunter S. Thompson

<º)))><

Waiting for the time when I can finally say
That this has all been wonderful, but now I'm on my way

Show us who didn't get a hearing please.

No idea. I just know that no POTUS did it for 80 years.

_________________

_________________

So it's not SOP. Great thanks.

Neil Gorsuch will probably stand as one of the few positive parts of Trump's legacy when all is said and done.

If the Democrats want to filibuster him, they do so at their own peril as I don't think there will be any pushback for nuking it here. With an unfavorable Senate map in 2018, the Dems will want that tool at their disposal and will regret this move.

_________________
“When I walked in this morning, and saw the flag was at half mast, I thought 'alright another bureaucrat ate it.'" - Ron Swanson

It would be nice if a universally respected statesman could emerge from an opposition party to define what "advice and consent" should mean to senators.

_________________
O judgment! Thou art fled to brutish beasts,
And men have lost their reason.

It would be"nicer" if someone explained to the Senators that the job of making laws belongs in part to them, and not to the Supreme Court at all.

_________________

I think Gorsuch and many judicial nominees before him, have tried to explain.

However, it is the Senate's job to confirm but they seem to have no standard by which they will operate.

_________________
O judgment! Thou art fled to brutish beasts,
And men have lost their reason.

I have no use for Gorsuch or any other nominee who flagrantly lies while trying to sell himself as a golly gosh gee willickers level headed unbiased believer in stare decisis.

It's bad enough that he's the well schooled say nothing propsed by the Heritage foundation and the original intent hypocrites at the Federalist society. But then to be so limp wristed as not to allegedly have any admitted opinion when asked about the $10 million in dark money that put on the pr campaign for this timid joke. All the posturing about not wanting to tip his hand is a complete farce and shameful. But I'd expect nothing less from this group of Republican "leaders".

And after this fraud I don't believe that the insincere apple has fallen far from the poisoned tree that was his contemptuous mother.

_________________
There are only two examples of infinity: The universe and human stupidity and I'm not sure about the universe.

Smoke on the street is that the GOP wouldn't have the votes to go nuclear...

...wondering if that's a bluff to get the Dems to filibuster this guy.

Reports are they have the votes to nuke it. Confirmation vote will be next Friday.

Trump has been as much of disaster as I thought, but Gorsuch is a fine silver lining to me.

_________________
“When I walked in this morning, and saw the flag was at half mast, I thought 'alright another bureaucrat ate it.'" - Ron Swanson

Agreed. This is one of the few things I needed to have happen in my world and not have Trump fuck it up.

_________________
Elections have consequences.

What lies did he tell exactly?

_________________

That he doesn't believe that politics or the degree to which his untold personal beliefs should be a topic for discussion in any confirmation hearing. Or that there is some relevant bar to clear to confer legitimacy on his candidacy.

Or that he expects that his heretofore ingrained beliefs will/could be changed by his elevation.

Or that he doesn't know what a $10MM PR campaign to steer his appointment represents in our nation's constitutional history.

Or that he can consider himself a more worthy candidate than Merrick Garland

_________________
There are only two examples of infinity: The universe and human stupidity and I'm not sure about the universe.

I'm sure he believes that his personal politics should have no bearing on his confirmation. Nor should his personal beliefs. The SC shouldn't be deciding things on their personal feelings or beliefs. It's truly unfortunate that he has to explain that to the likes of numerous US Senators who are charged to decide on his nomination but don't even know, or care to know, what US law says about this very thing.

He never stated that his beliefs would change based upon his elevation. Again, cases should be decided based upon the Constitution, not on his personal beliefs or Elana Kagan's for that matter.

He certainly doesn't need a PR campaign to get himself approved. And that is totally out of his control.

You are free to believe that he doesn't admire Merrick Garland, but that hardly makes his stated feelings a lie. The cheap ploy pulled by Stuart Smiley and others once again highlights the lack of bona fide qualifications of the people who are to vote on his nomination.

_________________

Seriously, the senators questioning him in that confirmation hearing embarrassed themselves thoroughly by showing they do not understand the purpose of the SCOTUS.

_________________
“When I walked in this morning, and saw the flag was at half mast, I thought 'alright another bureaucrat ate it.'" - Ron Swanson