/n/ - News

If republicans actually follow through for once instead of acting tough to only give up a few weeks later I will be very impressed.

>>340697

This is likely a good thing, not bad. However, that all depends who will be the next one to hold office.

Obama wants to fill the empty seats with more commies that will vote to destroy more of your liberties.

Why the fuck did Obama nominate a moderate, and not a liberal?

>>340726

The only people calling him moderate are fucking liberals.

>>340697

> It would be a betrayal of our best traditions

This piece of shit has some nerve talking about betraying our traditions.

>>340726

He's not a moderate. He wants to repeal the 2nd amendment

>>340728

THIS.

>>340735

AND THIS.

Ever since Antonin Scalia was knocked off, Obama has been trying to find the right commies to replace him. We all know he hated Scalia because he was a key figure who slammed down carbon taxation as unconstitutional and deliberate fraud/extortion. He also was a big 2nd Amendment supporter.

Nope, Obama and his communist gang of treasonous jackbooted thugs can't have a man like that in the Supreme Court! Got to have a commie who will take a shit on our constitutional rights and everything we stand for as a nation. Just like everyone else he appoints.

>>340728

THIS.

>>340735

AND THIS.

Ever since Antonin Scalia was knocked off, Obama has been trying to find the right commies to replace him. We all know he hated Scalia because he was a key figure who slammed down carbon taxation as unconstitutional and deliberate fraud/extortion. He also was a big 2nd Amendment supporter.

Nope, Obama and his communist gang of treasonous jackbooted thugs can't have a man like that in the Supreme Court! Got to have a commie who will take a shit on our constitutional rights and everything we stand for as a nation. Just like everyone else he appoints.

fucking post broken piece of shit site!

>>340726

Because the Republicans control Congress. If it was a Democrat PotUS and a Democrat Senate, we'd see Obama market the most far-left judge he could find for the appointment and the Senate committee would play a couple games of poker to make it look like they actually did something besides just say "yup".

Obama has to cave a bit and find a guy that's appealing to the Republicans but would still do things like uphold handgun bans or environmental taxes.

>>340750

Did you ever stop and think that the tone of your writing and the word you pick are why we don't look like normal people but instead look like paranoid crackpots?

>>340753

doubleposting because you're whining about how the site won't let you post just makes you look like a faggot.

TRUMP WILL END NSA SURVEILLANCE

>>340831

He can't. He can only nominate. Congress decides. And since he's been using his pen to go around congress the last couple years, congress ain't too happy with him.

>>340822

What would you call nominating someone with a history of bipartisan support, while shaming the Republicans into respecting to apolitical nature of the court?

Don't forget that the Republicans are already terrified of losing the Senate in November.

>>340801

He doesn't know. He just keeps following orders. Or do you really think a fucking shitskin would be able to come up with a plan to cuck the entire nation?

>>340846

Guilt. The only thing I might have done differently is nominate the Indian judge. That way the Republicans are not just obstructionists, they're also racist against Asian Americans .

Either way, they're getting pressured n a crucial election year with a nominee they feel is destroying their party's chances going forward..

>>340791

>tone policing

>>>/reddit/

>>340839

i think you have that backwards anon. the 2nd greatest love of a politician is the blame game. and that white-house pen figures directly into the corporate/billionaire agenda. so the congress folks shrug their shoulders at the voting public and say it was the president, not us congress people. which leaves impeachment, and that is utterly useless. so basically the corporations and/or billionaires trying to achieve their sacred cow, now… only have to buy a presidential pen stroke, far cheaper than buying both sides of congress. A LOT CHEAPER.

>>340839

sure, you can believe in all your personal rights crap, which will prove meaningless in the forth coming years. the fact of the matter is, the powers that be have not decided who will get the lifetime appointment. so in the meantime, your going to get feed the smoke&mirror show.

>>340872

>actually using the term 'tone policing' unironically

Fucking bizarroSJWs should all be shot. Are we gaslighting you too, faggot?

>>340791

>average person is too stupid to understand politics and the corruption inherent

>thinks people who do understand them are cuhraaazy

Proof that the people deserve a boot stamping their faces into the dirt for all eternity

>>340840

If they lose the senate in november the democrats will get what they want anyway

You're a fucking retard for thinking "if you don't give us what we want, we'll try to make you lose so we get what we want!" is in any way a convincing argument

>>340840

>the republicans are terrified of losing the senate in november

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_elections,_2016

You're a fucking retard on multiple levels. Even if they lost every single senator in a blue state they'd still retain control of the senate

>b-but maybe they'll lose red state senators too!

Not going to happen retard

>>340935

Note- republicans are going to win Ohio, Florida, Iowa, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania in 2016 so those are red states

>>340801

>quoting ruboto

>who lost to his own country by Trump

>>340928

That sort of faggotry makes me angrier than anything.

It's on the same level as that "internalized racism" shit that SJWs do in order to disregard the opinions of minorities who call them out for being lunatics.

>>341937

stop posting pictures of Obama's baby photos please

I don't see what the Republican goal is here.

Right now, they have the Dems forced to nominate a moderate, who's already in his 60s.

If Trump or Cruz is the next President, there's still no guarantee that their nominee will be any more acceptable to the Republican establishment.

While if Clinton or Sanders wins, they're going to be faced with a hard left-wing judge being nominated instead.

It seems like a lose/lose on their part, and that's aside from the way it makes them look like obstructive whiners.

>>343022

>obstructive whiners

The only people who look bad here are democrats who have been on record as repeatedly declaring their opposition to appointing nominees during election years even when it was just speculation on the possibility of a justice retiring but are now going "n-no we didn't mean it before if you don't give us what we want then we will be mad at you!"

And "establishment" justices like kennedy are shit anyway and never vote conservatively when it actually counts

>>343053

Oh please, the last time the Dems did that, it was two months before elections, not an entire year.

And people have short memories. Most won't remember that, but only what's happening now.

And, like I said, odds are good it won't wind up with the Republican establishment getting a pick they'll like better, no matter who wins.

>>343022

>Clinton

>hard left wing

Just because someone is more authoritarian doesn't mean they are left wing.

>>343077

Fair enough, but I doubt it'll be a nominee the Republicans find more favorable than Garland.