As to be expected it would seem that the caving on
the part of our beloved Senate Republicans has already begun with some
Republican insiders already choosing to distance themselves from what has been
described as the unyielding stance taken by Republican leaders who refuse to
consider any nominee Barry “Almighty” may offer up to fill the seat left vacant
by the recent death of conservative Justice Antonin Scalia.
While no prominent Republican has yet suggested they
would actually vote to approve any nominee put forward by Barry, I think we can
all safely agree that it’s likely to be only a matter of time before such
suggestions begin to be heard. These
‘prominent’ Republicans are, however, already said to be questioning Senate
Majority Leader Mitch McConnell's apparent tactic of preemptively refusing to
hold confirmation hearings.
Shortly after the news of Scalia's death broke it
was McConnell who said, "The American people should have a voice in the
selection of their next Supreme Court justice. Therefore, this vacancy should
not be filled until we have a new president." But I’m assuming that since he made that
statement our spineless majority leader is now having some second thoughts. No surprise there! I’m sure it won’t be long before he’s begins
singing a very different tune!
Bradley A. Blakeman, someone identified as being a
Republican strategist and senior staffer to former President George W. Bush,
has said, "What I'm hearing is, all the sudden, the backtracking on this
line in the sand that whoever the president puts up is dead on arrival. They've
come way off that." He added, "That was a huge mistake, because you
never ask someone to do what you wouldn't do yourself." I would argue that the mistake is to have
already begun backtracking.
If the roles were reversed, he said, Republicans
would insist that a nominee put forth by a Republican president in their final
year in office should get the constitutionally mandated review. Yup, that they would be, and ‘Dingy Harry’
Reid, with Chuckie Schumer standing right next to him, would very loudly say,
“Not only NO, but FUCK NO!” And those on
our team would simply scurry off to the nearest corner and not bring it up
again.
Since McConnell's statement, several Republican
senators have stepped forward to support the preemptive rejection of any Barry
nominee. But on Tuesday it was Iowa GOP
Sen. Chuck Grassley, the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, who left
open the possibility that hearings would be held on any nominee that Barry
would put forward. Grassley is yet
another limp-wristed dildo that should have been sent packing years ago!
And on Wednesday, it was GOP Sen. Orrin Hatch who
said that while Grassley is free to hold hearings if he wants, doing so would
be "foolish." Hatch went on to
say, "The decision has been pretty well made that in order to protect the
integrity of the court during this very, very political time and such a big
political brouhaha … let's put it off until next year. Then whoever is president, whether it's
Democrat or a Republican, will have a right to nominate whoever they
want."
Also on Wednesday, GOP Sen. Dean Heller issued a
statement urging Barry to "use this opportunity to put the will of the
people ahead of advancing a liberal agenda on the nation's highest court." Why is it that those on our side always seem
to reside anywhere but in the real world?
This guy is a complete moron if he fails to understand that Barry is a
rabid ideologue who doesn’t give a squat about the will of the people!
By encouraging Barry to nominate a justice who might
be acceptable to Senate Republicans, Heller appeared to be distancing himself
from McConnell's hardline stance against any consideration. And, again, it was Blakeman who said the
growing consensus is that it would be difficult for the Senate to refuse to
fulfill its constitutionally mandated "advise and consent" role,
especially given Scalia's status as a strict constructionist.
Blakeman said, "Do what the Constitution
requires you to do." And then
added, "The president is required to put up a nominee. The Senate is
required to advise and consent. So that's what you do." Blakeman did not suggest any nomination that
Barry might make would be likely to pass muster in the waning months of his
presidency, but rather that attempting to ignore or summarily reject it would
be counterproductive. But I disagree!
And it was Blakeman who went on to say, "This
is exactly what the American people are sick and tired of," he said.
"This petty politics that, ‘You did this to me 10 years ago, so I'm doing
it to you now.' …They're fed up to their eyeballs with entrenched politics, and
that goes for both sides of the aisle."
Actually what I’m fed up with is the ease with which those on my side
seem to be so willing to constantly be the ones made to bend over and spread
‘em!
Democrats have already signaled their rhetorical
line of attack against a GOP refusal to hold confirmation hearings. They are
positioning it as an echo of the unpopular 2013 government shutdown over
funding that caused 800,000 federal workers to be furloughed. And the Democrat
minions in the state-controlled media have also begun to chime on the side of
their Democrat masters with some already characterizing McConnell's proposal as
"a government shutdown of the U.S. Supreme Court."
And it’s the partisan hack Chuckie Schumer who has
been predicting, practically since the day after the death of Scalia was
announced, that the political pressure bought about in an election year will
force Republicans "to back off this extreme, partisan stance." Schumer in recent days has been busy trying
to ‘clarify’ his 2007 statement advocating a blanket opposition to confirmation
of any George W. Bush appointee to the High Court.
And on Wednesday, White House spokesmoron Josh
Earnest addressed Barry's own attempted 2006 filibuster of the nomination of
Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito.
Earnest said, "This is an approach the president regrets.” He added then-Sen. Barry “Almighty” and his
fellow Democrats should have instead made "a public case" against the
nomination. Earnest went on to claim,
"They shouldn't have looked for a way to just throw sand in the gears of
the process."
I’m sure you’ll forgive me if I throw the bullshit
flag on that one. It’s only because the
shoe is now on the other foot that Barry chooses to supposedly ‘regret’ his
blatant partisan political act! It’s
always different when they are in charge.
Democrats always seem to have their own set of rules by which only they
are allowed to play. Because whenever
others try to play by those rules it’s always the Democrats, with their
steadfast stooges in the state-controlled media who start screaming.
At the end of the day, how it is that the Senate
Republicans choose to react to this latest challenge will foretell the future
of the Republican Party. It was in 2010
that we gave Republicans control of the House, and in 2012, despite numerous
disappointments, we allowed them to keep it as we did again in 2014. And it was in 2014, after mistakenly
believing all of the promises that were made, we gave them control of the
Senate. And what do we have to show for
it?
And I would argue that what has transpired over the
course of last 5 years, is not much different than what would have taken place
had we had ‘Dingy Harry’ Reid and Nancy Pelosi in charge over that very same
period of time. We are still spending
more than we are taking in, we still have Obamacare, we still have illegal
immigrants flooding into the country and we still have far too few Americans
able to find work. So what good have our
Republican majorities really done?
No comments:
Post a Comment