Notice Catch Your Senator, Jeff Merkley at his finest. CSPAN2

I didn't hear you bitching about Obama's abuse of powers. But hey....it's the Republicans, so it's okay to bitch about THEM, huh?

And if you're still butthurt by the fact that businesses influence this country, then feel free to give up your cars, IPhones, TVs, gas, oil-based products, and basic consumer goods. And medicine. And bottled water. And clothes. And everything else that those supposed "evil rich people" provide us through the corporations that they run.

Because ultimately, this isn't about "Rich People". You don't bitch and moan about Paul Allen when he's building up the Seahawks and Trail Blazers. You don't bitch and moan about a multi-millionaire producer in Hollywood when he makes a blockbuster movie. You don't bitch and moan about Bill Maher's $25 Million/year salary.

No. This isn't about "the rich". This is about your hatred for Corporations.

I've never seen a bigger bunch of whiners and hypocrites since Trump was elected in my entire life. Never. Obama gave numerous tax breaks for corporations when it suited him...nobody here bitched and moaned about that. Obama circumvented Congress and signed executive orders for his agenda in private, not to mention he pissed on the constitution whenever he wanted......nobody here bitched and moaned about that.

But oh....Republicans do it, and everyone loses their minds.

Get over yourselves.

 

Selective memory, eh?? All the Republicans did from 2008 through 2016 was bitch, moan, slander and obstruct. Nothing Obama did or could do was ever reasonable for the RWNs. The things that were said about Obama would have made a whore blush. It's the nature of the beast, dude. You apparently didn't have any heartburn when the shoe was on the other foot, but now, somehow, you act like it's so unfair. Maybe you need to get over it too. It's called politics and if there is a dirtier game in the world, I'd love to see it. That said, how can you not view Donald Fucking Trump as a serious embarrassment to this country at the very least? And he has yet to do anything positive whatsoever for the "little peopLe" he conned into voting for him. All I've seen is serious damage, with more on the way......

 

Firstly, I didn't listen to the media. Secondly, I'm not saying it's unfair. I'm saying it's hypocrisy.

Easy.....I don't watch mainstream media news, read the Washington Post, or listen to late-night talk show hosts. Nor do I take the cherry-picked assumptions of Liberals on forums seriously.

He's given more freedoms to businesses, which I consider a win, since without them most of the population in this country would be homeless.

That's a win in my book.

 

Naw! but whiners that wail about him are.

 

Bullshit as usual from you. You know perfectly well that the 60-vote supermajority was used over and over against the Democrats. Yet they didn't change the rule, as Republicans are now, the first time it's any problem to them.

 

All through the 60s and before, the filibuster was used by Southern conservatives (who were Democrats and are now Republicans) to stop civil rights. Finally, conservatives have been conned into getting rid of the filibuster. At last.

 

Sorry, but I can not find a statement of truth anywhere in your post.

uh, no this is the first time a filibuster has been used to block a the approval of a nominee to the court.

The dems did change the rule for all judges below the SC. 2013 I think.

Yes, it is the first time the filibuster has ever been used against a SC nominee.

 

It is worthy noting that the Constitutions only calls for the advice and consent of the Senate. That would be a majority.

"He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments"

See the Treaties! It is suppose to be 2/3 of the Senate consent. The last treaties was executed without any consent of the Senate.

 

LOL. Right. This coming from a guy who thinks heroine dens are a safe place for children.

I assume you're talking about the Nuclear Option? If so, I wouldn't get all high and mighty about it....

https://www.conservativereview.com/...he-nuclear-option-before-they-were-against-it

We're not living in the 60s anymore. Get with the times.

Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/06/us/politics/filibuster-senate-republicans.html?_r=0

So again....it's alright when the Democrats do it.....but oh, not the Republicans! Hypocrite.

There you go. Thank you.

Don't tell him facts. He's afraid of that. He'd rather believe dramatic headlines like (for example) "OH NOES! TRUMP REMOVING HEALTHCARE! WE ALL GONNA DIEEEE!" instead of actually studying the topic from unbiased sources.

 

Confirmed.

 

So many assumptions here. You're a silly guy.