It happens regardless of the “system”.
And counting on “The People” is a futile exercise.
Difference of degree. Constant war.
It’s all there is.
The issue here is not funny at all, hence why the Republican controlled Senate put off Obama’s nomination. That’s the way it is generally done too.
The real abuse of power was with Pelosi and the impeachment. Nothing could stop the Lower chamber because they were in control of the lower chamber at the time.
Hear! Hear! 
I found that to be completely nuts myself. 
The topic of this thread is the confirmation is justified. It is not based on past statements by the senators rushing this confirmation before an election.
They don’t need to justify her confirmation. They have the power, and she will be on the court. But I will not bow and say you people are justified. You are not.
You mean DiFi who got a concealed carry permit and packed a gun in her purse for years? I had no problem with her carrying except she was against other folks carrying.
Smelled kind of hypocritical to me.
“I’m not willing to make a deal”
I expect the hypocrisy, it’s the babbling stupidity that irks me.
“QUEEN OF THE WORLD!”
Power to fiat.
No “Law of Amy” 
She has been an embarrassment to me for decades. She was good for S.F. in the wake of the Moscone/Milk assassinations but I have never been happy to have her as a Senator. 
1 Like
I will say this; this committee has behaved itself very well on both sides of the aisle so far.
Any objections to merging the two threads?
no, you’re just spouting off irrelevant dnc talking points
1 Like
Im listening to this between jobs, I’ve noticed this as well, kind of refreshing in my opinion.
For some reason many are under the assumption that the Confirmation of Justice Amy Coney Barret is wrong or immoral or even unconstitutional. However they are all incorrect, they are referring to the Lame Duck scenario. This is simply not the case, though we are close to an election the official election does not start until Nov 3rd in which by then Justice Amy Coney Barret will, unless she is denied the position after the hearings, be voted for the replacement of the Late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. This is the process of our constitution, and would only be a Lame Duck election if it was initiated or the proceedings surpassed Nov 3 2020 general election. Therefore the questions of if Justice Amy Coney Barret’s confirmation is legitimate should not even be a topic. The questions that should be asked or challenged is Justice Amy Coney Barret qualifications and is her prestige sufficient for the Supreme Court of the United Stated of America. The Lame Duck definition thanks to Wiki:
In politics, a lame duck or outgoing politician is an elected official whose successor has already been elected or will be soon. The official is often seen as having less influence with other politicians due to the limited time left in office. Conversely, a lame duck is free to make decisions that exercise the standard powers with little fear of consequence, such as issuing executive orders, pardons, or other controversial edicts. Lame duck politicians result from term limits, planned retirement, or electoral losses. Even at the local level, politicians who do not seek re-election lose their credibility and influence to fellow councilors. Projects uncompleted may fall to the wayside as their influence is greatly diminished.
3 Likes
Of course there was.
Libs had that sense of urgency.
There is “no justification” only when looking at this issue through the liberal prism. 
What an absurd reply.
