Jump to content

DanRydell

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    1401
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by DanRydell

  1. I had mis-read your post and edited #80 accordingly.
  2. Which of the nominees not already confirmed by voice vote fit that criteria?
  3. I’m not conflating anything. I’m asking you what your calculus is for deeming a nominee uncontroversial.
  4. Marcus was confirmed 50-46, so at least based on the final vote, it appears he does not fit your criteria of being uncontroversial. He was referred out of committee and thus placed on the Senate Calendar on January 18 along with 29 other executive nominations. Of those 30, 8 were confirmed with a voice vote within one month by a voice vote. Only one has been confirmed with more than 50 votes. Of the remaining 21, which ones are uncontroversial and what is your basis for concluding such?
  5. IIRC, there was a game where the phone lines got crossed and the coaches’ boxes could listen in on each other so Ma Bell donated the trophy
  6. “Your 3-year-old spic ass didn’t follow our laws. Rot in hell motherfucker.”
  7. I assume either would drop a bowl to add this one. No SEC teams get jazzed for a trip to Shreveport or Birmingham so I assume they'd happily drop either for Vegas.
  8. During one of those obstructionist hearings.
  9. So you started a thread for the purpose of accusing Democrats of obstructing Trump's executive nominees but you don't actually have any knowledge of what nominees have been obstructed or how?
  10. For which uncontroversial nominees have Dems demanded hearings and roll call votes and/or filibustered? What is your test for whether a nominee is uncontroversial?
  11. I didn't ask you how legislative bodies work. I'm quite familiar with the process, House rules, and parliamentary procedure. I asked you specifically which nominations are being obstructed by Democrats and in what manner.
  12. Specifically which nominations are being obstructed by Dems and how?
  13. We could follow the same immigration policy we did for the first century of our existence and which led to the United States being the greatest country in the world.
  14. Blocking hearings and votes is obstruction. Voting against confirmation is not.
  15. This lib has been criticizing Senate obstruction of judicial nominations since Bush was President. Just because you’re a hypocritical piece of shit doesn’t mean everyone else is. I guess trust funds can’t buy principles.
  16. He may well have. And you would have roundly criticized him.
  17. The catcher was still between third and home maybe 15-25 feet down the base line so I don’t think Bryant could have gotten past him before the ball was thrown to him.
  18. Anyone who thinks they’re middle class while earning more than 97% of Americans has zero credibility as an arbiter of bullshit.
  19. And most Americans would see raising your taxes (and probably those of most of us on this board for that matter) as a tax increase on the rich.
  20. A single-income household with the earner making $127k per year is earning more than about 85% of American households annually. A married couple both maxing out of the SS tax are earning more than 97% of American households annually.
  21. The national anthem itself is the robocall in this analogy, not the kneeling.
  22. It’s impossible that someone could marry you if they’re not at a minimum willing to overlook racism in a person
  23. And then we elected a president whose racial views would have been regressive in 1865.
  24. I’m not opposed to that balancing test but it’s contrary to existing free exercise law under Employment Division v. Smith. I also think it’s different, not legally but morally, if it’s a baker in Denver, where hundreds of competitors are happy to serve you rather than say in Lufkin, where you could conceivably be blackballed by the entire town.
×
×
  • Create New...