Jeremiah Ames
Well-Known Member
The right wing believes they’re in a battle against evil.
Yet, they are blinded to the fact that they ARE the evil.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Chuck Schumer votes against a qualified nominee for justice because..."
- Thread starter whirlingmerc
- Start date
The right wing believes they’re in a battle against evil.
Yet, they are blinded to the fact that they ARE the evil.
May I take this post, changing the subject from the OP to the racial make up of the US Senate, as an unspoken admission that the OP was not true? That Schumer didn't actually vote against a nominee on the basis of race?
What I am seeing here is the kind of lie commonly used in the media, the partial truth kind. Where someone makes a claim that would be obvious nonsense if the entire quote, and the context, were included.
Is that what I am seeing here? It certainly looks like it.
Tom
It could be that he didn't vote against the nomine cuz he's white.
It could be just cuz he isn't black.
That's not racism.
But I don't know his reason.
esmith
Veteran Member
Probably cuz Trump nominated him.
However, Schumer did open himself up to attacks with his statement that did address race. This Nation is becoming so divided I'm glad I'm over 3/4 century old.
Something about Lincoln's speech is starting to take on ominous foreboding.
"A house divided against itself cannot stand"
however this was addressed to the division involving slavery; however nothing says the issue of slavery can not be replaced.
Why is Merrick Garland not on the Supreme Court?
Tom
esmith
Veteran Member
Because he isn't
Because the Republicans care more about partisanship than the USA.Because he isn't
That's why I won't vote for one.
It's not because I think the Democratic party is any great thing.
The Republicans wouldn't vote for Garland because he was nominated by the President. They didn't care about process or the country, what they cared about was partisan politics.
Tom
Buddha Dharma
Dharma Practitioner
I wouldn't say that. However, what would you have Democrats do? Keep weakening and losing elections while the other side plays dirty?
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Only bad guys are allowed to play dirty.
esmith
Veteran Member
And you think that only the Democrats care more about their party than the Republicans.
Both parties have different philosophies on what is and is not right for the country. When the Dem's have the chance they will push their agenda through, same goes for the Republicans. So you can't really say both are wrong or both are right. They have to compromise, which at the present time neither side wants to do. Right now the Dem's think they can win the 2018 elections with their talking points(?) so they are not about to do anything that would jeopardize their plans, same goes for the Republicans.
Feel free to answer the question, "Why isn't Garland on the SCOTUS?".And you think that only the Democrats care more about their party than the Republicans.
I understand why you might find that awkward.
Tom
esmith
Veteran Member
Simple ; because dumb-*** nominated him.
tytlyf
Not Religious
You're stuck in your bubble. Nothing to be proud of.
tytlyf
Not Religious
You clearly don't understand that republicans support corporate policies and democrats support middle class policies. There are no benefits to voting republican if you're in the lower middle class.And you think that only the Democrats care more about their party than the Republicans.
Both parties have different philosophies on what is and is not right for the country. When the Dem's have the chance they will push their agenda through, same goes for the Republicans. So you can't really say both are wrong or both are right. They have to compromise, which at the present time neither side wants to do. Right now the Dem's think they can win the 2018 elections with their talking points(?) so they are not about to do anything that would jeopardize their plans, same goes for the Republicans.
But I know why you do vote republican.
He said quite clearly why he did.
Partly because the people who got to decide whether he would sit or not found him to be ideologically incompatible with the office he was going to assume. You going to pretend it is the first time that has happened?
Partly because the senate leadership saw the opportunity a vacant SC seat offered in the elections.
A question just as real is why Obama didn't nominate someone who could get through the Senate.
The answer to that is same. He was ideologically opposed to someone the senate would consent to, and he thought the empty seat might be of help in the election.
Unfortunately, we have two factions who would rather compete to claim supremacy over the other than find workable solutions. It is a continual cycle of divisive one-upsmanship.
sandy whitelinger
Veteran Member
Or live in more than half of geographical America.
sandy whitelinger
Veteran Member
And the beat goes on.And you think that only the Democrats care more about their party than the Republicans.
Both parties have different philosophies on what is and is not right for the country. When the Dem's have the chance they will push their agenda through, same goes for the Republicans. So you can't really say both are wrong or both are right. They have to compromise, which at the present time neither side wants to do. Right now the Dem's think they can win the 2018 elections with their talking points(?) so they are not about to do anything that would jeopardize their plans, same goes for the Republicans.
Its kinda the way the system was designed by those ignorant, hick, British farmers who framed our sorry a** framework of government. All that checks and balances folderal.