Originally Posted by Guest

It is a shame people are more concerned with taking sides then they are about what is in the best interest of all of us.

The best interest scenario is to follow your duties you swore to. The GOP should accept the nomination and then do what they want. Simply refusing to even consider is a slam at how this oountry works. They have made just the simple act of nominating a person into political theatre.

Originally Posted by Guest

The best interest scenario is to follow your duties you swore to. The GOP should accept the nomination and then do what they want. Simply refusing to even consider is a slam at how this oountry works. They have made just the simple act of nominating a person into political theatre.

After Obama's opening ACT!

Originally Posted by Guest

The best interest scenario is to follow your duties you swore to. The GOP should accept the nomination and then do what they want. Simply refusing to even consider is a slam at how this oountry works. They have made just the simple act of nominating a person into political theatre.

Is that what you said as Harry Reid held a hundred bills passed by the House on his desk, not allowing them to be voted upon? I thought not. The Senate is doing the right thing by not allowing the nomination to go through right now. It's their prerogative. They are not breaking any laws, or rules. There is no hurry, no wars are on the line. So, get over it.

You might want to do your homework before opening up your mouth. You are clearly uninformed about history.

Originally Posted by Guest

Call me crazy, but the last time anyone refused to do their job, they were FIRED! McConnell is NOT doing what the taxpayers of Kentucky voted him to do. First Rate even by low Republican standards, Merrick Garland, should, at the very least, be considered for appointment to the Supreme Court. Another example why the citizens of this great country are frustrated with a "do-nothing" congress. Get rid of all of them!. Even Rubio got caught with his knickers down. Is there anyone in congress that we can trust???

Don't come on a public forum and tell other people what they should do. I can assure you that nobody cares about your uninformed opinion.

Originally Posted by Guest

The best interest scenario is to follow your duties you swore to. The GOP should accept the nomination and then do what they want. Simply refusing to even consider is a slam at how this oountry works. They have made just the simple act of nominating a person into political theatre.

Sure wish this forum came with a reality check, followed by a pie in the face for false statements. Who would win this contest???

The thread has devolved to the waste of time level of tit for tat.

Harry DID get fired from leader, by the VOTERS. Sen. McConnell is doing exactly what the voter put him in there to do. At least, right now. Of course, knowing how congress is, so wish-washy he could change his mind again next week.

As liberals said, elections have consequences. The Republicans won, so live with it until your side has the power again. You refused to work with the Republicans when you had the power, so don't bother to cry now. No one is listening.

Originally Posted by Guest

Call me crazy, but the last time anyone refused to do their job, they were FIRED! McConnell is NOT doing what the taxpayers of Kentucky voted him to do. First Rate even by low Republican standards, Merrick Garland, should, at the very least, be considered for appointment to the Supreme Court. Another example why the citizens of this great country are frustrated with a "do-nothing" congress. Get rid of all of them!. Even Rubio got caught with his knickers down. Is there anyone in congress that we can trust???

If we give walking papers for not doing they're job Dirty Harry would of been gone alooooooooooong time ago. the Shyt for brains should read the owner's manual and replaced the bungi cords on his excerise equipment. But just like Obama care he didn't read that either other than the part how much kickbacks he would be getting from the Lobbists.

Originally Posted by Guest

Don't come on a public forum and tell other people what they should do. I can assure you that nobody cares about your uninformed opinion.

Are you kidding? Uninformed opinions and telling people what to do is the basis for many on this forum. Your post is case in point.

Originally Posted by Guest

Harry DID get fired from leader, by the VOTERS. Sen. McConnell is doing exactly what the voter put him in there to do. At least, right now. Of course, knowing how congress is, so wish-washy he could change his mind again next week.

so, the people of Kentucky now determine when a president can nominate a justice to the Supreme Court? To my knowledge those are the only people I know of who elected this walking talking turtle welfare recipient.

Originally Posted by Guest

so, the people of Kentucky now determine when a president can nominate a justice to the Supreme Court? To my knowledge those are the only people I know of who elected this walking talking turtle welfare recipient.

Duhhh, there is more than one senator in the Senate, retard. Did you really think that he is doing all this on his own?

Originally Posted by Guest

Duhhh, there is more than one senator in the Senate, retard. Did you really think that he is doing all this on his own?

I will just let that comment sink in. After all he is indeed the subject of the original post, he is who determines who gets to nominate and when a supreme court justice can be sent to the Senate ... I will just let your idiotic comment sink in ... duh there are more than one senator in the senate, duh.

Does it matter to those who are calling the republicans obstructionists, et al that the republicans are doing exactly what they told Obama they would do if he tried to fill the slot as a lame duck.

Does it matter to those same Obama supporters that the reublicans are merely doing exactly what the democrats did is similar situatons in the past?

Do the supporters know there is a Biden rule calling for not appointing a justice during a lame ducks term?

Do the supporters know that their Obama as a senator spoke strongly against allowing appointing a justice during a lame duck term.

And we all know the answers will be but that was when it was a republican president was trying to do it. And we know that it was the democrats that were the "obstructionists".

So that obviously was different and OK by their book.

BS!