Harry Reid's grab for power

the difference being, the senate republicans block, or at least try and block everything


then blame the dems


snort

second term ..

Nine nominees await votes on the Senate floor, and there is a backlog of 42 nominees awaiting Judiciary Committee processing. President Obama has put forth a full slate of nominees to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, each of whom was given the highest possible rating by the American Bar Association. Nominees are pending for 19 of the 37 vacancies classified as “judicial emergencies.”

You've changed Old T, you've changed. Care to say what part of the GOP platform is so unelectable? I don't recall anyone chanting slogans about Cruz, making posters of him, invoking his name like either a mantra or prayer. Do not confuse the worship of Obama with the gratitude that Cruz is taking a stand. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

You are missing the point. It isn't what I agree with or not--the electorate as a whole are telling you that the Reps were not electable last go round.

In 2008 I am convinced that Papa Joe Stalin running as a Dem would have won; the Reps had no real chance because too many of the casual voters had been turned off by wars and the 8 years of Bush/Cheney.

But in 2012 it should have been the same in reverse: with the state of the economy it should have been ripe for a Rep win. But somehow they managed to snatch defeat from the jaws of a victory they should have been able to win relatively easily. From talking with a lot of apolitical people it was largely because the Reps came across as aloof and uncaring.

Personally I found both platforms were mixed bags--I liked some things in each, but wasn't thrilled about either as a whole. But again, my comment was not about me--I make no claim to be a "typical" voter.

It is too early for me to get too worked up about the 2016 nominees, but if the Reps do nominate Cruz I think they will be making a similar mistake--I do not see him appealing to the middle masses and therefore I do not see him capable of winning. he isn't Reagan; Reagan was a hard nosed SOB about a lot of things, but he was a likeable SOB. Cruz is not, Romney was not. Not saying they are "better" candidates based upon their views (I don't know enough about them in detail), but I would think Christie or Rubio would be less bad choices.

Whether we like it or not (and I do not) elections are at least as much about image as they are about message, and the Sesame Street 60 second attention span generation isn't going to change.

I've been a registered independent for near 50 years, but I have voted Rep far more often than Dem. I really do want the Reps to give me I can vote for without feeling slimy.

The difference is that the GOP was blocking the court who has the important cases to be ruled on via Obamacare. Originally Posted by WTF

There you go dumshit, you just admitted it. Going for the nuclear option is not about the numbers, which fail to prove Republicans are holding up judicial appointments any more than Dems did. It's not about any so-called judicial emergency, since the DC district court is the most underworked federal district court in the nation. It's about forcing Obamacare and the rest of Odumbo's far-left wing-nut agenda through the federal court system!

Thank you for conceding my argument!

There you go dumshit, you just admitted it. Going for the nuclear option is not about the numbers, which fail to prove Republicans are holding up judicial appointments any more than Dems did. It's not about any so-called judicial emergency, since the DC district court is the most underworked federal district court in the nation. It's about forcing Obamacare and the rest of Odumbo's far-left wing-nut agenda through the federal court system!

Thank you for conceding my argument! Originally Posted by lustylad

if you request civil discourse then provide some

if you request civil discourse then provide some Originally Posted by CJ7

??? I'm not requesting anything. Are you paying attention? WTF just threw in the towel on your whole line of argument. He said yeah, it's a sheer Obama power grab. So all this talk about Republican obstructionism and judicial emergencies is just deflective cover and spin. It's balm intended to soothe the queasy consciences of the dwindling number of libtards who still have a conscience or think gee, maybe it wasn't such a good idea to throw away centuries-old rules for transient political gain.

??? I'm not requesting anything. Are you paying attention? WTF just threw in the towel on your whole line of argument. He said yeah, it's a sheer Obama power grab. So all this talk about Republican obstructionism and judicial emergencies is just deflective cover and spin. It's balm intended to soothe the queasy consciences of the dwindling number of libtards who still have a conscience or think gee, maybe it wasn't such a good idea to throw away centuries-old rules for transient political gain. Originally Posted by lustylad

yeah, my bad, I had you confused with another dumbass.

There you go dumshit, you just admitted it. Going for the nuclear option is not about the numbers, which fail to prove Republicans are holding up judicial appointments any more than Dems did. It's not about any so-called judicial emergency, since the DC district court is the most underworked federal district court in the nation. It's about forcing Obamacare and the rest of Odumbo's far-left wing-nut agenda through the federal court system!

Thank you for conceding my argument! Originally Posted by lustylad

It is wtf it is. Politics 101. I have no trouble telling it the way it is. My point is : Why are you lil bitchs crying about it? When in power , you will relish it, not abandon it! That is why I have posted the GOP really wanted it. They know they will be in power soon enough....as soon as they can kick these Tea Fucks to the curb in their primaries. Hell the GOP should already be a majority in the Senate!

??? I'm not requesting anything. Are you paying attention? WTF just threw in the towel on your whole line of argument. He said yeah, it's a sheer Obama power grab. So all this talk about Republican obstructionism and judicial emergencies is just deflective cover and spin. It's balm intended to soothe the queasy consciences of the dwindling number of libtards who still have a conscience or think gee, maybe it wasn't such a good idea to throw away centuries-old rules for transient political gain. Originally Posted by lustylad

That is not exactly wtf I said. Just because the Dem have finally grown some balls does not mean I disagree with them or think the GOP does not deserve a swift kick in the nuts with a boot labeled politics 101.

That is not exactly wtf I said. Just because the Dem have finally grown some balls does not mean I disagree with them or think the GOP does not deserve a swift kick in the nuts with a boot labeled politics 101. Originally Posted by WTF

I say the republicans developed the reputation for blocking the A gap, ... so the senate dems ran a jet sweep..

No, no, no Old T, it is not Stalin. I have always said that the democrats would elect Hitler because he is such a dynamic speaker, he is charismatic, he can speak to the masses, and HE CAN WIN! Which is all democrats care about (Obama is proof of that). Besides Stalin is a hero to the democratic socialists.

How about this: Rosanne Barr thinks Obama is a dictator now http://twitchy.com/2013/11/25/rosean...mpaign=twitter

This naked power grab by the Dims reflects their fear that they'll lose the Senate in 2014.

This naked power grab by the Dims reflects their fear that they'll lose the Senate in 2014. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

I am not a great fan of the "dims" as you call them, but it will be fun listening to you dumbs if they retain the majority ...