she has stopped a lot of legislation don’t kid yourself. she is holding up the stimulus bailout now since it doesn’t contain what she wantsLet me know in which case did she ALONE make a decision which affected the whole legislative process , without allowing the rest of the House even to discuss it on the floor? The way McConnell acted was a perfect example of autocratic behavior, exactly like any king, despot or dictator would act. Why do you try to deny it? Is it embarrassing? It should be!
power-grab? what is expanding the court to suit your agenda as the Dems threaten to do? Mcconnell is just playing the game as it is allowed. like the Dems…Then don’t tell me it’s correcting a mistake when it’s really a power grab.
“If they ruled it to be unconstitutional, I will send to the United States Congress, and it will pass I believe, a bill that legislates Roe v. Wade adjusted by Casey,” Biden said, referring to a later Supreme Court case that prohibited undue burdens on abortion rights. “It’s a woman’s right to do that. Period.”
Just my theory…why are so many on this board upset with a pro-life catholic judge?
Do you advocate non-constitutional activity then?Playing by the rules allowed by the Constitution, a position I wouldn’t advocate…
Very short sighted.but when a Republican Senate won’t look at a Supreme Court nominee in the last year of Obama’s presidency but will push through a Trump nominee, then you do what you have to do.
Most frequently in divorced and remarried or live-in situations. Evil is the result of sin.That happens everyday in single wife families.
Sorry, I thought I was clearer.What are you asking about?
Sounds to me like you do not advocate following the rules allowed by the constitution.Playing by the rules allowed by the Constitution, a position I wouldn’t advocate
I agree. But I need to qualify that.No, but I think that both sides will need to reach a compromise that actually works at some point and it’s clear a Senate held by Republcians will play games, so it probably will be necessary for a Democratic Senate to push things to get a compromise in place.
Correct.The Constitution does not say how many Supreme Court justices should be on the court, so, if the Democrats in Congress decided to change that, it would be allowed by the Constitution.
How else does a senator get in place if not elected by the voters in his state?Actually, it wasn’t the majority of voters that voted for a Republican Senate. Remember, the Senate is not representative.
Perhaps not.Oh, I agree, unless there is a threat that the Democrats will expand the Court when they are in power, there is no reason for the Republicans to compromise. Furthermore, that goes both ways as I expect you won’t be seeing attempts to find common ground with Republicans going forward.
Come on…you can’t get a laugh from it?So nice. And I thought we were having a fruitful conversation, but you couldn’t help yourself.
It wasn’t.No, it was an insult because it was directed to me.
Actually, it wasn’t the majority of voters that voted for a Republican Senate. Remember, the Senate is not representative.
The State is not truly represented in the Senate. At least not in my State. We have a 60/40 split of Republican/Democrat registered voters. The entire state votes for both Senators. The State puts 2 Republicans into the Senate. The 40% are not represented in the Senate at all. The 40% are disenfranchised.How else does a senator get in place if not elected by the voters in his state?
You are correct that the senate is not representative of the people…they represent the states.
But they are still voted for by the people in the states.
That 40% is not disenfranchised. They are represented in the house.The entire state votes for both Senators. The State puts 2 Republicans into the Senate. The 40% are not represented in the Senate at all. The 40% are disenfranchised.
Not in the Senate.That 40% is not disenfranchised. They are represented in the house.
They are not supposed to be represented there.Not in the Senate.
what do you call packing the court, that the Dems threaten? isn’t this playing games…a Senate held by Republcians will play games,
for Catholics, the issue would be the reason, they will pack the court to secure abortion. this is what they are fighting for, is it acceptable to the church?The Constitution does not say how many Supreme Court justices should be on the court, so, if the Democrats in Congress decided to change that, it would be allowed by the Constitution.
actually it was, the majority in their states.Actually, it wasn’t the majority of voters that voted for a Republican Senate. Remember, the Senate is not representative.
Correct.The primary function of the Senate is to represent the interest of the state in the political process as opposed to the House of Representatives which represents the interest of the people.
The Senate represents the State which comprises the People by legal definition.To claim that a block of voters is disenfranchised for lack of representation is to lose sight of what exactly the senate represents.
Well, I don’t know what to tell you.The Senate represents the State which comprises the People by legal definition.
Too bad they don’t make an example of “the people v A.B.”The people of a state, in their collective capacity, considered as the party wronged by a criminal deed; the public; as in the title of a case, “The State v. A. B.” The circumstances or condition of a being or thing at a given time.
Do they have the power to not bring a bill to the floor?The leader of the house has no power . . .
but that is not the intentBut not the majority of voters in the country.