Wild74 Posted September 21, 2020 Share Posted September 21, 2020 Rush Limbaugh encourages Senate to skip hearings for Trump's SCOTUS nomineeThe Hill ^ | Sept 21, 2020 | Dominick Mastrangelo Posted on 9/21/2020, 2:57:23 PM by where's_the_Outrage? Conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh urged Senate Republicans to skip the confirmation hearing process for President Trump's soon-to-be announced Supreme Court nominee and head straight to a floor vote. "I want the Judiciary Committee - that could be great if it were skipped," Limbaugh said Monday on his daily radio program. "We don't need to open that up for whatever length of time, so that whoever this nominee is can be Kavanaugh'd, or Borked, or Thomas'd. Because that's what it's going to be, especially when it's not even required." (Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Youngcoach123 Posted September 21, 2020 Share Posted September 21, 2020 9 minutes ago, Wild74 said: Rush Limbaugh encourages Senate to skip hearings for Trump's SCOTUS nomineeThe Hill ^ | Sept 21, 2020 | Dominick Mastrangelo Posted on 9/21/2020, 2:57:23 PM by where's_the_Outrage? Conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh urged Senate Republicans to skip the confirmation hearing process for President Trump's soon-to-be announced Supreme Court nominee and head straight to a floor vote. "I want the Judiciary Committee - that could be great if it were skipped," Limbaugh said Monday on his daily radio program. "We don't need to open that up for whatever length of time, so that whoever this nominee is can be Kavanaugh'd, or Borked, or Thomas'd. Because that's what it's going to be, especially when it's not even required." (Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ... This idea has been floated around since the passing of RBG. Just go straight to a vote if Barrett is nominated due to the fact that she already had confirmation hearings in the senate. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BarryLaverty Posted September 21, 2020 Share Posted September 21, 2020 Interesting in its cowardice and failure to even pretend to follow due process and show appropriate respect for the Supreme Court. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Youngcoach123 Posted September 22, 2020 Share Posted September 22, 2020 33 minutes ago, BarryLaverty said: Interesting in its cowardice and failure to even pretend to follow due process and show appropriate respect for the Supreme Court. She had a hearing already, there was due process Barry. All that is needed is a nomination and a vote per the constitution. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DB2point0 Posted September 22, 2020 Share Posted September 22, 2020 2 hours ago, Youngcoach123 said: She had a hearing already, there was due process Barry. All that is needed is a nomination and a vote per the constitution. I’m still trying to figure out how it’s cowardice Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Youngcoach123 Posted September 22, 2020 Share Posted September 22, 2020 26 minutes ago, DB2point0 said: I’m still trying to figure out how it’s cowardice It’s not, he probably read it described as that. Regurgitated talking points is all leftist are. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
88YoePride Posted September 22, 2020 Share Posted September 22, 2020 Almost 500,000 members in the #WalkAway Campaign FB group, and every testimonial by a former Democrat features the phrase "Then I started to do research." But too many are still violently allergic to facts and logic. Misinformed and addicted to Kool-aid is no way to go through life, young man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RETIREDFAN1 Posted September 22, 2020 Share Posted September 22, 2020 13 hours ago, BarryLaverty said: Interesting in its cowardice and failure to even pretend to follow due process and show appropriate respect for the Supreme Court. Show me in The Constitution where "hearings" are required to replace a Justice on the Supreme Court........... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BarryLaverty Posted September 22, 2020 Share Posted September 22, 2020 The Constitution actually left it open for Congress to develop, and in the 20th century they did so. What is Rush and the GOP afraid of? That someone would be thoroughly vetted as to their qualifications and their legal stances and found to be lacking? Everyone knows that they are trying to push through this Barrett, so that they can make a move on Roe V. Wade and a half dozen other 'social issues' can be dealt with, including repealing the ACA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RETIREDFAN1 Posted September 22, 2020 Share Posted September 22, 2020 14 minutes ago, BarryLaverty said: The Constitution actually left it open for Congress to develop, and in the 20th century they did so. And a MAJORITY can change it at will...........should do away with hearings and get this seat settled.....then we will get at least one more NEXT term......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ObiOne Posted September 22, 2020 Share Posted September 22, 2020 37 minutes ago, BarryLaverty said: The Constitution actually left it open for Congress to develop, and in the 20th century they did so. What is Rush and the GOP afraid of? That someone would be thoroughly vetted as to their qualifications and their legal stances and found to be lacking? Everyone knows that they are trying to push through this Barrett, so that they can make a move on Roe V. Wade and a half dozen other 'social issues' can be dealt with, including repealing the ACA. I see no way it happens. But what would a repeal of Roe/Wade look like? Would it have any effect on the abortions in blue states? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RETIREDFAN1 Posted September 22, 2020 Share Posted September 22, 2020 1 minute ago, ObiOne said: I see no way it happens. But what would a repeal of Roe/Wade look like? Would it have any effect on the abortions in blue states? A repeal of that abomination would leave it up to the individual states, as was intended by the authors of the Constitution for issues not addressed directly......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ObiOne Posted September 22, 2020 Share Posted September 22, 2020 1 minute ago, WestHardinfan1 said: A repeal of that abomination would leave it up to the individual states, as was intended by the authors of the Constitution for issues not addressed directly......... So the ones doing the most baby killing would still get to keep killing just like normal? Then why is the left so worried if it gets repealed? It isn't like it will make abortions illegal. You just might have to drive over to the next state to kill your unborn child. Seems like if you are that committed to murder your baby, a short drive wouldn't be that much of a deterrent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gamewatcher63 Posted September 22, 2020 Share Posted September 22, 2020 54 minutes ago, BarryLaverty said: The Constitution actually left it open for Congress to develop, and in the 20th century they did so. What is Rush and the GOP afraid of? That someone would be thoroughly vetted as to their qualifications and their legal stances and found to be lacking? Everyone knows that they are trying to push through this Barrett, so that they can make a move on Roe V. Wade and a half dozen other 'social issues' can be dealt with, including repealing the ACA. So are you saying she wasn't thoroughly vetted in 2017 for the 7th circuit? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now