Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: President attacks 'so political' courts


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: President attacks 'so political' courts Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: President attacks 'so political' courts - 2/9/2017 3:18:01 AM   
WickedsDesire


Posts: 9362
Joined: 11/4/2015
Status: offline
wtf greta....

(in reply to Greta75)
Profile   Post #: 21
RE: President attacks 'so political' courts - 2/9/2017 3:26:07 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: lovmuffin


quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961


quote:

ORIGINAL: WickedsDesire

The other fellow who will be voted to the Supreme court either way, needs 51 votes, the nutickers changed the rule of 60, to simple majority. Now how did president dangerous fukwit do this....Christ dont tell me it was an executive order?

Actually can you explain the 60 rule to me. That's from 100 isn't it, or kinda 60% rule (to low)...whats the origin of that one?



Actually the Senate did this, the president has no control over senate rules.

In point of fact, when the dems controlled the senate, the republicans raised a major stink, calling it a move to eliminate republican power in the senate, and therefore wrong to do so.

So, the democrats backed off and left the super majority rule (rule of 60) in place.

Now, that the Republicans have control of the senate, then of course if they do it, there is no move to eliminate the voice of the other party.

Basically, it is political hypocrisy in action.


I don't recall that the Democrats backed off. I thought it was the Democrats who changed the rule (the nuclear option) for legislation to get Obama care to pass. They changed it for approving judges and cabinet members. The only thing they didn't change it for is SC judges. I wouldn't doubt the Republicans would change it for the SC if necessary. The Democrats are having to swallow their own pill.

Nope, your first change of it (and it is clearly illegal to change it as it in the way it has happened) was the nutsucker Nixon (who else)? Named the nuclear option by the nutsucker Lott.


_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to lovmuffin)
Profile   Post #: 22
RE: President attacks 'so political' courts - 2/9/2017 3:46:29 AM   
WickedsDesire


Posts: 9362
Joined: 11/4/2015
Status: offline
So senate can do it with a simple majority? And it, in ways, applies retrospectively and they can apply it to what suits them? or is that rule gone forever? doesn't seem particularly democratic to me...oh the hillbilly judge- at least he spoke out i spose

Do none of the gutless fuks abstain? Are they legally obliged compelled to vote as instructed whipping we call that over here but at least some of them (all parties) are not gutless toerags and defy the chief whip. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whip_(politics)#United_Kingdom

< Message edited by WickedsDesire -- 2/9/2017 3:54:40 AM >

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 23
RE: President attacks 'so political' courts - 2/9/2017 3:58:17 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
No, with a simple majority they will vote it back when it is convenient to do so.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to WickedsDesire)
Profile   Post #: 24
RE: President attacks 'so political' courts - 2/9/2017 4:05:13 AM   
WickedsDesire


Posts: 9362
Joined: 11/4/2015
Status: offline
When did they vote for the change, I couldnt find anything on wiki, or anywhere really.

Do you see what i am saying? eg lets use trumps nominee hillybilly did it occur before or after the change? And no-one can hurl it, the 60-->simple majority, out as unconstitutional?

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 25
RE: President attacks 'so political' courts - 2/9/2017 4:21:33 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
I have always thought it should be litigated, as breach of contract at the least. But it is convenient for both parties, at their time of power. The 60 rule was changed to simple majority (51) back in 2013 and has remained in place since then. This horseshit about triggering the 'nuclear option' is theater for the feeble minded. It is done and has been done for some time.


_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to WickedsDesire)
Profile   Post #: 26
RE: President attacks 'so political' courts - 2/9/2017 4:30:40 AM   
WhoreMods


Posts: 10691
Joined: 5/6/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Greta75


quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
Of course, Native Americans have a nasty habit of drinking themselves to death, as the incidence of alcoholism is higher among native Americans than any other segment of society, which has led many reservations to ban the sale of alcohol on reservations.

This very strange alcoholism problem seem to be the bane of most tribes in any country. Same problem with aboriginals in Australia.

Racial or cultural groups that haven't spent thousands of years developing a tolerance for the stuff after inventing it themselves have terrible problems with booze if invaders introduce it, Greta. It's a general thing.

_____________________________

On the level and looking for a square deal.

(in reply to Greta75)
Profile   Post #: 27
RE: President attacks 'so political' courts - 2/9/2017 4:38:56 AM   
WickedsDesire


Posts: 9362
Joined: 11/4/2015
Status: offline
(oh I remember the 2013 thingy) ta again.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_option what a fuking mess

(in reply to WhoreMods)
Profile   Post #: 28
RE: President attacks 'so political' courts - 2/9/2017 5:23:52 AM   
KenDckey


Posts: 4121
Joined: 5/31/2006
Status: offline
I will agree that Trump has a big mouth and huge ego.

(in reply to Greta75)
Profile   Post #: 29
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2]
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: President attacks 'so political' courts Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.094