Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
User Journal

Journal damn_registrars's Journal: Prepare for a new record in un-productivity 62

Journal by damn_registrars
Now that Scalia is dead, the GOP-run congress has something else to try to prevent from getting done for a year. They've shown that they are willing to leave appointments vacant for long spans of time before, but can they leave a SCOTUS seat open for 12 months?

That said, if they do then the GOP could face a new nightmare situation next February, when President Lawnchair becomes SCOTUS candidate Lawnchair, under the new President Clinton.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Prepare for a new record in un-productivity More

Prepare for a new record in un-productivity

Comments Filter:
  • After what was done to Robert Bork, I don't want to hear a godforsaken thing from the Left about SCOTUS appointments. That is all.
    • The hypocrisy of a SCOTUS nominee who wanted to give more power to the executive, when you claim that President Lawnchair somehow has too much power as an executive, is amusing.

    • Yes, but why do the republicans want to wait for Hillary to make the next appointment? Is it because she is one of them? If Obama does wait, it will be because the DNC asks him to. And besides, congress will most likely sit on their hands.

      Bork probably would made one of the best justices ever. Personally, I think he would have brought some pleasant surprises to the bench, kinda like Blackmun did.

      • Yes, but why do the republicans want to wait for Hillary to make the next appointment

        Because in their war on reality, they have convinced themselves that they can win the presidential election this year. Even if they pull out all their illegal tricks they still don't have much of a chance with any of the candidates they have rolled out so far. They don't want Hillary to make the next appointment, and they believe that they can win the appointment back to their side if they bring productivity to zero for the next 12+ months.

        If Obama does wait, it will be because the DNC asks him to

        I don't expect he would wait, even if the party wanted him to.

        • Obama will do what the party tells him to do. As a regular machine politician he serves them. I thought you would realize that after the ACA passed in the form that it did. Like all good soldiers he will follow their orders.

          And after the last two elections, don't be so confident that the present day balance of power will be upset. Republicans still have a 50/50 chance. The clown act is also a pretty good reflection of their average voters, and a collaborative effort with democrats to scare people out of vot

    • Heh, still carrying that tragedy in your back pocket? Pro-tip: Bork was sunk with nothing more than his own words. You call it calumny, the rest of the world calls it schadenfreude.

      Now, go find an actual grievance, not an imagined one.
  • Putting forward any non-white left-of-center person puts the republicans in a predicament. They need the non-white vote, and having the republicans holding it up is going to hurt their chances in November - and they know it. But they can't NOT object to someone left-of-center. It's a lose-lose for them :-)
    • Left of center? There is no left of center left in this country (with the possible exception of Bernie Sanders). President Lawnchair is demonstrably right-of-center, and up to this point has shown himself by action to be the most conservative president in the history of our country. I'm not sure if he even knows anyone who is left-of-center any more.

      Indeed though this is a no-win situation for the GOP. They either have to approve someone who Obama nominates, or they lose the 2016 election badly and end

    • American voters aren't as liberal as you'd like to think, nor as reasonable. Congress is a more accurate reflection than most people will admit.

      • Incorrect. Republicans generally being more active at the state level than dems means they've historically had more control over redistricting and gerrymandering, so the HoP skews right compared to the country as a whole.

        • It's not impossible for neighbors to talk to each other and plan around the new districts. It's still the voters' problem. They just have to pay attention and work the system. The blame passing just doesn't fly in this household. And Republicans... please... The DNC money machine is every bit bit as corrupt.

          • Actually research the question in question or fall back on lazy conspiracy? Ladies and gentleman, the American Voter.

            • Will you run an engine lathe eight unfucking hours a day because the syndicate tells you the people need what the lathe produces? If you will, the people just becomes a new tyrant.

              • the people just becomes a new tyrant

                I don't see the problem.

                • :-) Well, while I'm in the 51%, I don't either

                  • So, does that make you a poseur or a hypocrite?

                    • Try sarcastic, or cynical, if you prefer, I don't care. Yeah, I know, it doesn't come across that way, but too bad. I vote conscientiously, not strategically, so I am actually in a very tiny minority of one and a half percent. You all know where you can stuff your *lesser evil* bullshit.

                    • No, you don't.

                    • :-) hee hee hee.. Can always expect you to show up to proclaim your faith... Well, you and your friend here can discuss amongst yourselves. I may or may not stay interested.

                    • You use that word as though you think you know what it means - or perhaps worse that you think you can by force of will make it mean whatever you want it to mean.

                    • You're blabbering the same nonsense as last time. And it's just as lame and stupid now as it was then. Your faith in your narrative is every bit as powerful as Mr. Smith's. Only he shows a bit more class and style. That's quite a trait you have there, making a republican look good. You must be on their payroll for them to portray you as the consummate democrat. It's a pretty good trick, very convincing, not that it takes much.

                    • You get less interesting as time goes on. Even my least interesting colleagues would at least manage to stay at the same level of un-interestingness, but you show how to constantly push that to new lows.

                    • You can stop responding any time you want. You do have the right to remain silent. Please make a note of it. Or you can keep on being the fool. I'm easy that way.

                    • I vote conscientiously, not strategically,

                      Ah yes, wankers like are why we got the catastrophic presidency of GWB. Thanks, asshole.

                      You all know where you can stuff your *lesser evil* bullshit.

                      Damn straight I do. They're called SCOTUS appointments.

                      Fucking amateur.
                    • His schtick about voting "conscientiously" is a lie any ways. That, or a total contradiction as he spends a lot of time trying to convince people not to vote at all. Very little of what he says about politics is likely the least bit credible.

                    • Nice try, but you can stuff it... Blame the people that voted for Bush, and thanks a lot, asshole, for offering a wanker like Gore and Cheney's evil twin Lieberman. You fucking dopes are what gave us what we have today. Take a hike, fool...

                    • :-) Damn, you make republicans look classy, and truthful! Please, keep up the lie the best you can, it is still fun to watch. What a bunch of dopes you are!

                    • Sorry, I'll make it simple for you. I didn't vote for Bush, so put your bullshit where your mommy never stuck her little finger. You gave the election to Bush by voting for Gore/Lieberman, so see how full of shit you are? Really, what an asshole, knocking people just because they don't follow you. So very typical of the sore loser. You really do deserve what you get with that attitude.

                    • Accusing me of being untruthful does not make your lie truthful.

                    • :-) gimme more

                    • For someone who doesn't' care, you sure like to spray a lot of random shit when someone calls your number...

                    • You're just a bunch of crybabies, thinking you're above the rest.

                    • Funny, that's what we're all calling you. Got a riposte that doesn't suck?

                    • That's funny. I'm not the one pissing and moaning about Booosch and 'stolen' elections... That's you morons blaming people for not playing along. He won it fair and square, but not with my vote (despite the lie you like to spread), and if he didn't, too bad, you didn't put up enough resistance. You all were on your knees for his whole term showing how utterly worthless the democrats are.

                    • It sure is easy to wash your hands of liability when you abstain from voting, isn't it?

                    • Hush child!

                    • You aren't really fooling anyone but yourself any more.

                    • You are welcome to what you believe... and reread the previous post.

                    • You provide more evidence to support than to refute what I have said.

                    • Okay... That is your opinion... based on fantasy, but no biggie.

                    • That's funny. I'm not the one pissing and moaning about Booosch and 'stolen' elections

                      Of course not, nice strawman. What you are is the asshole running thinking (and most importantly, ceaselessly bleating) about how above it all you are. And yet your verbal diarrhea and your fits of pique when called on your shit would suggest otherwise.

                      Once again: Poseur or hypocrite?

                      (despite the lie you like to spread)

                      You keep saying that but don't bother refuting it. Wonder why? :)

                    • What's to refute? You explicitly blame me for Bush's victory. I didn't vote for him, so that is your mistaken belief (Your apparent sincerity in this belief precludes me from calling a 'lie', so... touché)... And you still drone on and on about the 'stolen election' like it makes or ever made a damn bit of difference. You give your politicians what they want, you have no complaint, not any worth taking seriously anyway.

                      Now, put your pacifier back in...

                    • The Dude said that more convincingly, try again. Then again, you're not The Dude.

                    • Who?

                    • you're really not worthy [onebadlung.com] but I'll extend it to you regardless.

                    • Good enough. It applies to you...

                      I'm not worthy... Yeah, I'll never be able to troll with one hand like you do. You're the champ

                    • You explicitly blame me for Bush's victory.

                      Again, nice strawman. I'm not blaming you, I'm blaming Nader voters. [archive.org] If you're dumb enough to out yourself as one of them, there's nothing I can do to help you.

                      And you still drone on and on about the 'stolen election'

                      Actually, I've made zero allusions to theft, just liberal purity dumbassery. Thanks for the useless insertion.

                      like it makes or ever made a damn bit of difference

                      And the narcissism of the Slashdot liberal shines brightly through! Th
                    • No, you're not worthy of quoting The Dude - so kindly stop. You really don't deserve to be mentioned in the same sentence with him after this.
                    • He's a hypocrite, 100%. He's provided us a mountain of facts supporting that, many times over.

                    • Okay... Stop what?

                    • I'm not blaming you, I'm blaming Nader voters. If you're dumb enough to out yourself as one of them, there's nothing I can do to help you.

                      See? You are blaming me, and everybody else that doesn't play your 'lesser evil' game. I told you a long time ago that I did vote for him. I knew he wouldn't win. But it didn't matter who won between the other two. You can insist all you want that it does, but it doesn't. He was a no-confidence vote. It is something that should be on every ballot. If you can't acknowledg

                    • See? You are blaming me, and everybody else that doesn't play your 'lesser evil' game

                      Just because you see it as a game doesn't mean others do. You can question facts, but questioning motivation just brands you an idiot.

                      Yeah, and don't forget the guys who went to Afghanistan on nothing but lies also. Funny your apparently hypocritical stance on that

                      I didn't forget them. Unlike the right-wing morons I know that the Afghan War would have gone down pretty much the same under Gore as it did under Bu

                    • yet I've just pointed to a mountain of dead and mangled bodies that say you're full of shit

                      On the contrary, you just pointed to fact that you bought the lie that Gore/Lieberman wouldn't have done the same. Indeed, you are the one that is full of it. Your damn democrats wanted this as much as anybody. It was going to happen no matter what. Obama's bullshit in North Africa and Syria and continuation of Afghanistan should have opened your eyes a tiny bit, but nope, your rut is no different than Smith's. And th

                    • Would 9/11 have happened had Gore been president? Certainly.

                      Would President Gore have signed off on an invasion of Afghanistan to seek out Bin Laden and take down the Taliban? Almost certainly.

                      Would President Gore have celebrated the propagation of a mountain of lies to sell the invasion of Iraq? That is much more difficult to say. After all, Saddam Hussein didn't try to kill Al Gore's dad. Al Gore's dad wasn't POTUS the last time we went to war with Hussein. Neither Gore nor Lieberman were fina

                    • Would President Gore have celebrated the propagation of a mountain of lies to sell the invasion of Iraq? That is much more difficult to say.

                      Why? Your rationale explains nothing. Of course they would have. Lieberman wanted to invade Iran also. You got a mountain of lies to invade Libya (little American blood, so it's all good), You're getting a mountain of lies over who is financing the terrorism business in general, Syria, Iran, 'free' trade, the economy... Both wars (and the subsequent ones) were going to

                    • On the contrary, you just pointed to fact that you bought the lie that Gore/Lieberman wouldn't have done the same.

                      Jesus Christ, you hate reading or something? I haven't bought any lie, because that's not how I make decisions. One more time: I'm a gambler, and the odds of a post 9/11 invasion of Iraq by a Gore admin is shockingly low. I'm more than happy to be proven wrong (well, except for the losing money part), but nobody's bothering with that, you're just questioning my motivations again and fall
                    • I love how he keeps bringing up Lieberman like he wouldn't be treated like any other mushroom VP: Kept in the dark and fed on shit.

                      Pro-tip: Cheney was a huge aberration, but to know that you'd actually have to know what the fuck you're talking about, huh?

                    • Kept in the dark and fed on shit.

                      LOL

                      You're in a fantasy. You would have lost the bet for sure. Lieberman can match Cheney point for point, dollar for dollar.

                      I shall refer you back to your original crybaby quote:

                      Ah yes, wankers like are why we got the catastrophic presidency of GWB. Thanks, asshole.

                      No, thank you!

                    • Lieberman can match Cheney point for point, dollar for dollar.

                      Unfortunately, reality turned out so much different than your fantasy. No wonder you cling so hard to it.

                      No, thank you!

                      LOL, why are you thanking me? Unlike you, I didn't vote for an idiot, and yet you still think I did. You could ask one simple question that could clear it up and make you look like less of an ass, but you apparently prefer the taste of your own feet.

                    • :-) You just grade them on a curve.

                    • I didn't vote for an idiot

                      Oh, so you didn't vote for Gore either?

Slashdot Top Deals

Real Programmers don't eat quiche. They eat Twinkies and Szechwan food.

Close