Nothing like a little AP reading to get your blood going at lunchtime.
But Democrats worry that Republicans want to get rid of judicial filibusters so the White House can use the Senate's GOP majority to ram through a nominee that Democrats will find extreme and objectionable. If such a move were to succeed, it would give the GOP full control over which nominees could be confirmed for lifetime judgeships since the party controls the White House and has a 55-44-1 majority in the Senate.
I object to the word RAM. Ram? 55-44-1 is a majority. Majority rules.
"If Republicans roll back our rights in this chamber, there will be no check on their power," Reid said.
RIGHT? Majority rules. That’s the RIGHT.
But more importantly, both sides would have to operate on "good faith" when it comes to future nominations. Republicans would be bound not to ban judicial filibusters only if Democrats forswear judicial filibusters on court nominees except for extraordinary situations, aides said.
Don't do it! It's a trap! EXTRAORDINARY? You’ll see that word before you know it.
Posts
1 comment:
What an Idiot- Go back to school & take a civics lesson-
Your constant refrain of "Majority Rules" makes you sound like a 9 year old.
Does majority rule in Iraq?
Sunnis, Kurds, Baaths - they are trying to put together a government that represents THE PEOPLE not just the MAJORITY 9much like our fore-fathers did here)
Does your "Majority Rules" also apply to race? Maybe we can bring back slavery because one race has a majority over another-
Senate rules have been in place since the late 1700's
LEAVE THEM ALONE-
What other rules do you want to change- Gun ownership?
Your a misguided fool who would've done well in 1930's Germany
Post a Comment