Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 14 of 37 FirstFirst ... 4121314151624 ... LastLast
Results 196 to 210 of 542
  1. #196
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    35,686
    Quote Originally Posted by Scoots View Post
    The procedure doesn't change but the way it happens absolutely does change. What you are saying is that an team scrimmage is the same as a real game.

    It also comes down to what the party not in power can get out of it.

    It's the way it goes. And I never said any of it was good. It's all bad. It's all been corrupted. And it's all expected.
    The only way in which how it happens changes is that the side with the power can block things they don't like.

    Which is my entire point. You seem to be agreeing with me while trying to disagree with me.

    The only thing that has changed is what Republicans can and cannot do. That does not make going back on their stated reasoning for why they did what they did last time less hypocritical (even if we know their actual reason for doing what they did).

  2. #197
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    35,686
    Quote Originally Posted by Scoots View Post
    In the case of ACA congress could add 1 line of text to the ACA that makes no functional difference and that case goes away. It's all about the PR that it's still an issue at all.

    And parts of Roe v Wade have been in front of the court for the last 3 years and in the 8 years before that too. It still stands because the general public, and I suspect the GOP, likes it being there.

    You can't have it both ways ... either the SC is political and responds to the party (in which case the public matters) or it isn't political in which case the public doesn't matter.
    First Bolded: And we both know Congress as currently constructed (i.e. Republican Senate) will not add any line of text; because they want Obamacare to be repealed altogether, hence the lawsuit the Supreme Court will be deciding on shortly.

    Second Bolded: And the difference is for the past 3-8 years Republicans did not have a 6-3 advantage on the Supreme Court. If you don't think their ultimate goal is the revocation of Roe v. Wade you haven't been paying much attention.

    Third Bolded: It's not having it both ways. It's literally a fact. a Supreme Court decision is not dependent on public opinion. The Public can be overwhelmingly against repealing Roe v. Wade and the SC can vote to repeal it anyway. Do you dispute that?

  3. #198
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    34,371
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    The only way in which how it happens changes is that the side with the power can block things they don't like.

    Which is my entire point. You seem to be agreeing with me while trying to disagree with me.

    The only thing that has changed is what Republicans can and cannot do. That does not make going back on their stated reasoning for why they did what they did last time less hypocritical (even if we know their actual reason for doing what they did).
    My point was that when the Senate and WH are not the same party all nominations are more contentious than when they are the same party.

    And you say "the only thing that has changes is what the Republicans can and cannot do" ... what the Democrats can and cannot do hasn't changed just as much over the years? Yes, the Republicans are taking full advantage of the tactics available, the part I am pushing back on is what appears to be you saying only the Republicans do that.

  4. #199
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    35,686
    Quote Originally Posted by Scoots View Post
    My point was that when the Senate and WH are not the same party all nominations are more contentious than when they are the same party.

    And you say "the only thing that has changes is what the Republicans can and cannot do" ... what the Democrats can and cannot do hasn't changed just as much over the years? Yes, the Republicans are taking full advantage of the tactics available, the part I am pushing back on is what appears to be you saying only the Republicans do that.
    They're more contentious because one party can block the other. That's literally the difference.

    And I could have just as easily used Democrat instead of Republican in that sentence, it works the same way. The reason I used Republicans is because they are the ones who have been able to do what they want in 2016 and 2020.


    I am not saying only Republicans do that, I'm saying the Republicans are the ones doing it right now. You are pulling another both sides. Yes, both sides are hypocrites for various things. Republicans are being hypocrites on this issue.

  5. #200
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    34,371
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    First Bolded: And we both know Congress as currently constructed (i.e. Republican Senate) will not add any line of text; because they want Obamacare to be repealed altogether, hence the lawsuit the Supreme Court will be deciding on shortly.

    Second Bolded: And the difference is for the past 3-8 years Republicans did not have a 6-3 advantage on the Supreme Court. If you don't think their ultimate goal is the revocation of Roe v. Wade you haven't been paying much attention.

    Third Bolded: It's not having it both ways. It's literally a fact. a Supreme Court decision is not dependent on public opinion. The Public can be overwhelmingly against repealing Roe v. Wade and the SC can vote to repeal it anyway. Do you dispute that?
    It's not up to the Senate, it's up to the House to add the line.

    I think the goal is for both parties to keep the public scared of the other side. If they repeal Roe completely then they need a new boogeyman to replace it immediately. I think they'd rather keep the PR battle alive.

    Again, if the SC is politicized then they are "following orders" from the party, and the party cares about what the public thinks. If the SC is not politicized then they are not doing what the party says.

    And sure the court can vote however they believe they should vote, and I think that's what they do most of the time. I'm just saying the absolutes I see talked about regularly would change the narrative based on public opinion.

    It is certainly possible Roe is repealed and ACA is killed, I just don't think it's the certainty many seem to be saying it is. Particularly considering it was supposed to be a certainty with the Kav nomination and it hasn't happened.

  6. #201
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    34,371
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    They're more contentious because one party can block the other. That's literally the difference.

    And I could have just as easily used Democrat instead of Republican in that sentence, it works the same way. The reason I used Republicans is because they are the ones who have been able to do what they want in 2016 and 2020.


    I am not saying only Republicans do that, I'm saying the Republicans are the ones doing it right now. You are pulling another both sides. Yes, both sides are hypocrites for various things. Republicans are being hypocrites on this issue.
    They are more contentious even when one part can't block the other party. The supermajority certainly made that a more common thing, but the Dems did away with that because despite being in control of the Senate the GOP was making them too annoying.

    And Dems are being hypocrites on this issue. 4 years ago it was #DoYourJob and vote for Garland ... now, not so much.

  7. #202
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    35,686
    Quote Originally Posted by Scoots View Post
    It's not up to the Senate, it's up to the House to add the line.

    I think the goal is for both parties to keep the public scared of the other side. If they repeal Roe completely then they need a new boogeyman to replace it immediately. I think they'd rather keep the PR battle alive.

    Again, if the SC is politicized then they are "following orders" from the party, and the party cares about what the public thinks. If the SC is not politicized then they are not doing what the party says.

    And sure the court can vote however they believe they should vote, and I think that's what they do most of the time. I'm just saying the absolutes I see talked about regularly would change the narrative based on public opinion.

    It is certainly possible Roe is repealed and ACA is killed, I just don't think it's the certainty many seem to be saying it is. Particularly considering it was supposed to be a certainty with the Kav nomination and it hasn't happened.
    First Bolded: Unless you are talking about something I'm unfamiliar with, the Senate would still have to also vote, and they would not.

    Second Bolded: This is a massive leap in logic. Just because their decisions are politicized or their nominations are doesn't mean they are following the orders of the party. The Justices will not repeal Roe v. Wade because the party says to, they will repeal Roe v. Wade because they believe it should be repealed. Similarly the party didn't nominate them because they will listen and do what the party says, the party nominated them because the party knows the Justices are likely to vote a certain way, such as repealing Roe v. Wade.


    But fundamentally, I also think you are incorrect in your suppositions because you refuse to believe how many conservatives want to revoke Roe v. Wade or would be OK if it were revoked (certainly how many conservative politicians do). If you think that Republicans who voted in the Justice who overturns Roe v. Wade will all start getting voted out of office due to the outrage of toppling Roe v. Wade, you don't know much about conservatives at all. They are going to cheer that decision, not bemoan it.

  8. #203
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    35,686
    Quote Originally Posted by Scoots View Post
    They are more contentious even when one part can't block the other party. The supermajority certainly made that a more common thing, but the Dems did away with that because despite being in control of the Senate the GOP was making them too annoying.

    And Dems are being hypocrites on this issue. 4 years ago it was #DoYourJob and vote for Garland ... now, not so much.
    If that's how you see it, you can just stop your pretense of being an independent or centrist right now.

    Democrats are responding to the hypocrisy of Republicans. They are not saying "don't do your job", they are saying "why are you being hypocritical in appointing a nominee now instead of saying one shouldn't be appointed in an election year in 2016?"


    Who do you think is being more hypocritical about this nomination right now? Republicans or Democrats?

  9. #204
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    52,302
    bOtH sIdEs

    PSD: where the moderators consistently cave to crybaby tattletales and it's a lot safer to be openly racist, hateful, and ignorant than to be a little rude to the racist, hateful, and ignorant

  10. #205
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    34,371
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    First Bolded: Unless you are talking about something I'm unfamiliar with, the Senate would still have to also vote, and they would not.

    Second Bolded: This is a massive leap in logic. Just because their decisions are politicized or their nominations are doesn't mean they are following the orders of the party. The Justices will not repeal Roe v. Wade because the party says to, they will repeal Roe v. Wade because they believe it should be repealed. Similarly the party didn't nominate them because they will listen and do what the party says, the party nominated them because the party knows the Justices are likely to vote a certain way, such as repealing Roe v. Wade.


    But fundamentally, I also think you are incorrect in your suppositions because you refuse to believe how many conservatives want to revoke Roe v. Wade or would be OK if it were revoked (certainly how many conservative politicians do). If you think that Republicans who voted in the Justice who overturns Roe v. Wade will all start getting voted out of office due to the outrage of toppling Roe v. Wade, you don't know much about conservatives at all. They are going to cheer that decision, not bemoan it.
    So, the house can't add that line to some big certain to pass bill and make the GOP choke on it? Really?

    I'm fine disagreeing on my opinion.

  11. #206
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    34,371
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    If that's how you see it, you can just stop your pretense of being an independent or centrist right now.

    Democrats are responding to the hypocrisy of Republicans. They are not saying "don't do your job", they are saying "why are you being hypocritical in appointing a nominee now instead of saying one shouldn't be appointed in an election year in 2016?"


    Who do you think is being more hypocritical about this nomination right now? Republicans or Democrats?
    I can be liberal and see the Dems and Reps as crap. I have no problem with that at all.

    And Dems ARE saying "don't do your job" considering they don't want hearings on any Trump nominee. At least that's the way they are talking.

    I think in this specific case of Trump and the Senate confirming a SC justice both are being hypocritical. I don't know which party has had more specifically hypocritical public statements.

  12. #207
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    35,686
    Quote Originally Posted by Scoots View Post
    So, the house can't add that line to some big certain to pass bill and make the GOP choke on it? Really?

    I'm fine disagreeing on my opinion.
    No they cannot if the Senate is not going to pass the bill.

    Your true colors are showing more every day. First you claim it's the Democrats really being the hypocrites on the SC Justice appointment saga, and now you're blaming the Democratic house for not adding the line to fix Obamacare knowing Republicans in the Senate will block it. How about blaming the party that is blocking the line from being added?

  13. #208
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    34,371
    Quote Originally Posted by spliff(TONE) View Post
    bOtH sIdEs
    Yeah, I think both parties are crap. I don't understand anyone who thinks one is good.

  14. #209
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    34,371
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    No they cannot if the Senate is not going to pass the bill.

    Your true colors are showing more every day. First you claim it's the Democrats really being the hypocrites on the SC Justice appointment saga, and now you're blaming the Democratic house for not adding the line to fix Obamacare knowing Republicans in the Senate will block it. How about blaming the party that is blocking the line from being added?
    So ... if the House adds it to a Trump and GOP sponsored bill they will kill their own bill to keep the exact language they don't like in the ACA from being removed from the ACA? Really?

    And I didn't claim it's Democrats "really being the hypocrites" ... I think the Dems and Reps are.

    And I just said, twice now in fact, that the House can get the language passed fairly easily. It could have been put in the CARES act and there was NO WAY the GOP would have stopped it.

  15. #210
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    35,686
    Quote Originally Posted by Scoots View Post
    I can be liberal and see the Dems and Reps as crap. I have no problem with that at all.

    And Dems ARE saying "don't do your job" considering they don't want hearings on any Trump nominee. At least that's the way they are talking.

    I think in this specific case of Trump and the Senate confirming a SC justice both are being hypocritical. I don't know which party has had more specifically hypocritical public statements.
    No, they are saying "If you said Obama shouldn't have done his job in 2016, then Trump shouldn't do his job in 2020". Why are you just ignoring the historical context here?

    And silly me, asking that question. OF COURSE you were going to say both sides and that you don't know whic his being more hypocritical. Of course you were.

Page 14 of 37 FirstFirst ... 4121314151624 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •