Thursday, February 18, 2016


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