A note to the Democratic Party:
I haven't the slightest doubt that if the situation were reversed, you would be howling blue murder about the "obstructionism" of the Republicans. In fact, in the past, you have. Who do you think you're kidding?
Try and remember back when Democrats ran both houses of Congress with an iron hand. Anybody recall any Democrats standing up and expressing concern that there wasn't enough "balance" on committees, rulemaking, and other issues? If everybody on the Supreme Court was a liberal, do you think any Democrats would be standing up and saying, "gee, this really isn't as balanced as it should be?"
Get the vote onto the floor where it belongs. You want to win, talk Senators over to your side. If your position on the judges is reasonable, as opposed to rank partisanism, you probably stand a pretty good chance.
Your side lost the elections. Deal with it. And let's stop pretending nobility and injured sensiblities. It stinks coming off of Democrats, who go for the jugular every time they have the power.
I know you believe in the marrow of your bones that there is no way you can lose elections unless some horrible injustice was done. That's the first thing you need to work on. Look in the mirror and think "Maybe, just maybe, our ideas and policies might have something to do with it."
Current Events » in reply to So many lies, so much spin...
You want to pick judges, win some elections.
The whole thread (24 posts)
- So many lies, so much spin...
- You want to pick judges, win some elections.
- Let's keep the marrow of my bones out of this (ick)
- So if one's party doesn't win an election, one loses all rights?
- Yes, and since the last election, all Democrats have been rounded up
- Not at all. But only the PRESIDENT nominates Federal judges.
- You know, the "looming theocracy" crap got old about two years into Reagan's first term.
- You want to pick judges, win some elections.
