Filibuster

[brenthutch 444]

There was a lot of bellyaching about the filibuster when the Ds had control of the Senate.  What do you guys think about it now? (You can breathe easy, McConnell said the Rs would respect the role of the minority and keep it in place)

[SkyDekker 1,465]

55 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

There was a lot of bellyaching about the filibuster when the Ds had control of the Senate.  What do you guys think about it now? (You can breathe easy, McConnell said the Rs would respect the role of the minority and keep it in place)

Didn't McConnell also say a SCOTUS nomination should not be voted on in the last 6 months of a presidential term and that a SCOTUS nomination should be voted on in the last 6 months of a presidential term?

[kallend 2,106]

33 minutes ago, SkyDekker said:

Didn't McConnell also say a SCOTUS nomination should not be voted on in the last 6 months of a presidential term and that a SCOTUS nomination should be voted on in the last 6 months of a presidential term?

But that's different!

[wmw999 2,544]

1 hour ago, brenthutch said:

There was a lot of bellyaching about the filibuster when the Ds had control of the Senate.  What do you guys think about it now? (You can breathe easy, McConnell said the Rs would respect the role of the minority and keep it in place)

And you believe that?

Wendy P. 

[brenthutch 444]

6 minutes ago, wmw999 said:

And you believe that?

Wendy P. 

Why wouldn’t I? To my recollection it was the Democrats clamoring for an end to the filibuster the Republicans never had.

[brenthutch 444]

56 minutes ago, SkyDekker said:

Didn't McConnell also say a SCOTUS nomination should not be voted on in the last 6 months of a presidential term and that a SCOTUS nomination should be voted on in the last 6 months of a presidential term?

And what does that have to do with the filibuster?

[wmw999 2,544]

Just now, brenthutch said:

And what does that have to do with the filibuster?

It has to do with McConnell lying to suit his party’s desire for power. He’s perfectly willing to lie

Wendy P. 

[brenthutch 444]

Just now, wmw999 said:

It has to do with McConnell lying to suit his party’s desire for power. He’s perfectly willing to lie

Wendy P. 

Oh Wow! A politician who lies to maintain power? You must have forgotten the politician who looked America in the eye and said “I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Monica Lewinsky”

[SkyDekker 1,465]

15 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

Oh Wow! A politician who lies to maintain power? You must have forgotten the politician who looked America in the eye and said “I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Monica Lewinsky”

Interesting you would pick that one and not one from an adjudicated rapist.

[SkyDekker 1,465]

21 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

And what does that have to do with the filibuster?

If it doesn't, why did you add commentary from McConnel to begin with?

16 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

Oh Wow! A politician who lies to maintain power?

So when you said we could breathe easy because a politician promised something, you forgot about this? Or you were deliberately lying? What were you trying to achieve?

[wmw999 2,544]

22 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

Oh Wow! A politician who lies to maintain power? You must have forgotten the politician who looked America in the eye and said “I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Monica Lewinsky”

So let me get this straight — you believe it because McConnell said it, and it doesn’t matter anyway because you’re happy with the results of that lie.

Wendy P. 

[jakee 1,563]

2 hours ago, brenthutch said:

Oh Wow! A politician who lies to maintain power? 

So explain again why McConnell is definitely telling the truth?

[brenthutch 444]

11 minutes ago, jakee said:

So explain again why McConnell is definitely telling the truth?

He has never threatened to take away the filibuster. 

[wmw999 2,544]

1 hour ago, brenthutch said:

He has never threatened to take away the filibuster. 

So? He never threatened to lie about the sanctity of supreme court justice nomination timing, either.

Wendy P. 

[jakee 1,563]

1 hour ago, brenthutch said:

He has never threatened to take away the filibuster. 

He never threatened to confirm a Justice in the last year of a presidency. He has though, as you point out, done whatever suits his party regardless of what he's previously said about it being the right thing to do.

[brenthutch 444]

3 hours ago, wmw999 said:

So? He never threatened to lie about the sanctity of supreme court justice nomination timing, either.

Wendy P. 

Two different things but I would not expect you to understand.

[wmw999 2,544]

It’s always different. And I understand lots of things quite well, even though I don’t have the additional brain in a dick 

Wendy P. 

[JoeWeber 2,836]

47 minutes ago, wmw999 said:

It’s always different. And I understand lots of things quite well, even though I don’t have the additional brain in a dick 

Wendy P. 

With an uncertain future now certain all of the arguing will become moot. As we get used to the new normal Brents railings will become uninteresting as arguing points as we all see the pointlessness of engaging. And then this forum will fade away.

[normiss 855]

4 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

With an uncertain future now certain all of the arguing will become moot. As we get used to the new normal Brents railings will become uninteresting as arguing points as we all see the pointlessness of engaging. And then this forum will fade away.

With the domain up for sale, our time here is already limited.

[JoeWeber 2,836]

1 hour ago, normiss said:

With the domain up for sale, our time here is already limited.

Well, you know what's going on so please put together some private group where we can detox. This site, I think, has low value so hoping for a savior is not a good play.

[jakee 1,563]

5 hours ago, brenthutch said:

Two different things but I would not expect you to understand.

Technically true, since you’re not saying anything that can be understood. 

[SkyDekker 1,465]

14 hours ago, JoeWeber said:

With an uncertain future now certain all of the arguing will become moot. As we get used to the new normal Brents railings will become uninteresting as arguing points as we all see the pointlessness of engaging. And then this forum will fade away.

Look I don't really agree with Trump, so I don't like the legal immigrants who are accidentally getting deported, but aren't those deportation camps awesome!