enter the fray: our reader discussion forum
Search in:
Advanced
View:FlatThreaded
Why are there 95 vacancies?
by Tom_Tildrum
Why weren't those vacancies filled in the last administration?
Re: Why are there 95 vacancies?
by ckone
The liberal obstruction for and up or down vote. Get a taste of your own medicine.
Re: Why are there 95 vacancies?
by opus512

ckone:
The liberal obstruction for and up or down vote. Get a taste of your own medicine.

Hardly. Some courts simply came up on their own, some were left over, and some get reappointed anyway.

Of course there's always some obstructionism, but the difference now is the GOP is doing it as a matter of policy. The Democrats came nowhere near that even with Bush.

The Republicans have taken everything to a new level. Sadly, the Democrats are starting to play along, but in a two party system there isn't really a choice but to play along.

Re: Why are there 95 vacancies?
by BlueEyesAustin

"the difference now is the GOP is doing it as a matter of policy. The Democrats came nowhere near that even with Bush."

Absolutely false.

Re: Why are there 95 vacancies?
by Ashigaru
Does anyone have any of the quotes during the Bush administration from Republican senators saying "Give them an up-or-down vote?" or about the "nuclear option?" I'm assuming that those came from sincere, heartfelt beliefs and weren't simply political gestures...right?
Re: Why are there 95 vacancies?
by kgswiger
BlueEyesAustin:

"the difference now is the GOP is doing it as a matter of policy. The Democrats came nowhere near that even with Bush."

Absolutely false.

Yes, your denial is absolutely false.

Re: Why are there 95 vacancies?
by opus512

BlueEyesAustin:

"the difference now is the GOP is doing it as a matter of policy. The Democrats came nowhere near that even with Bush."

Absolutely false.

And yet the numbers say I'm not.


Re: Why are there 95 vacancies?
by Kimmitt
Ooh, numbers. Those are like kryptonite to conservatives. Let's ask him for a cite. Either we'll hear crickets indefinitely, or he'll post something written by Ann Coulter's creepy cousin, or (my favorite) he'll post a citation which specifically disproves his point.
Re: Why are there 95 vacancies?
by iwiwiwa
<link> Here's a fun little article. Remember when the Republicans wanted to remove the filibuster option because there were 10 nominees out of 229 they couldn't get confirmed? It must be the easiest thing in the world to be a Republican politician. You could campaign that 2 plus 2 is 4 one year, 2 plus 2 is not 4 the next year, and as long as you professed a true love of guns and a real desire to control what women do with their bodies, the dumbasses who support you would never care. Or perhaps they just aren't smart enough to realize. Eh, half a dozen of one...
Re: Why are there 95 vacancies?
by Vegemighty
How big a deal is 95 vacancies? What proportion does this represent? Are we talking about a 1% vacancy rate? 10%? I suppose I could look it up. Or one of you could tell me.
View as RSS news feed in XML