Hell, no: Senate Republicans should not 'help out' Democrats on the matter of Feinstein's judicial seat

Doc7505

Diamond Member
Feb 16, 2016
15,719
27,676
2,430

Hell, no: Senate Republicans should not 'help out' Democrats on the matter of Feinstein's judicial seat

17 Apr 2023 ~~ By Monica Showalter

At The Federalist, Christopher Bedford has a graceful, well-researched item about the dilemma facing Democrats with Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California's incapacitation from shingles at the age of 89: That to get her out of there, they need to enlist the help of Republicans so they can fill her seat on the judiciary committee to get the Democrat judges nominated by Joe Biden through confirmation.
He explains it out this way:

Her mental decline has been known on Capitol Hill for years, with staff guiding her around the halls, and yet still just this year Sen. Chuck Schumer decided to let her remain on the Senate committee responsible for accomplishing the president’s judicial agenda.
She served on that committee until early March. Then finally, after six weeks away recovering from shingles, her California colleague, Rep. Ro Khanna, publicly called for her resignation. Democrats like Khanna had grown weary — between Feinstein and Pennsylvania Sen. John Fetterman, the party’s judicial agenda had been stalled since the top of March.
Hours after Khanna’s tweet, she asked to be temporarily replaced in her duties on the essential committee. Democrats are eager to comply.
But are Republicans so eager? They shouldn’t be. There’s zero reason — zero — that Republicans should cooperate with Schumer and the president on their judicial agenda, either tactically, politically, or even morally.
Republicans have the power, too: Committee assignments are decided at the beginning of the session, either by unanimous consent or, if contested, by the vote of at least 60 senators. Democrats certainly hope they can just brush this through under the former, but what reason does Sen. Josh Hawley, or maybe Sen. Mike Lee, or Sen. J.D. Vance have to let that one pass them by?
Seems the Democrat masterplan of filling every elected office with Democrats, by fair means or foul, and whether they are fit or fading, hasn't worked out very well for them.
~Snip~

Feinstein won, apparently scarfing up a lot of Republican votes because of the alternative, and we have since been rewarded by a judiciary committee that can't even get leftists through the confirmation process now. It's almost like winning for real in rock-hard rigged blue California as far as Republicans consider it. Democrats own this, and it's bitten them on the butt. Republicans shouldn't do anything to soften their 'ouch.'
Read the whole thing here.


Commentary:
Mitch McConnell is back. Expect GOP RINO senators to surrender to the Left and you will never be disappointed. Occasionally, you might be pleasantly surprised.

 
it's just business I know you have no concept of what it means to actually do your job.
I know you are so your bias against the republicans at all costs, Mr. Middle of the Roader. :laughing0301:
I also know that the democrats wouldn't lift a finger for the republicans.
Who are you even trying to fool. fool?
 
I know you are so your bias against the republicans at all costs, Mr. Middle of the Roader. :laughing0301:
I also know that the democrats wouldn't lift a finger for the republicans.
Who are you even trying to fool. fool?
They still have a job to do whether you like it or not.
 
The democrats seek to temporarily replace her as she is currently recovering from shingles. The republicans refuse this temporary replacement but it will be put up for a vote. Why because it will hold the vote of Biden judicial nominees. That is the real reason why they refuse to support a temporary replacement.

They are trying to make an age argument. Yet Grassley is 89 and he has not committed to retiring. Other republican senators have expressed support for him to stay. He has decide to November.

So this is just another move made by the opposition to delay. Why would it matter if another democrat temporarily replace her until she returns to work? Its similar to them denying Obama from making a nomination to the Supreme Court because he lost the election but still the president and can make that decision.

When something similar happen with Trump who had lost the election and then the republicans pushed those judicial nomination thru at the last hour.
 
The democrats seek to temporarily replace her as she is currently recovering from shingles. The republicans refuse this temporary replacement but it will be put up for a vote. Why because it will hold the vote of Biden judicial nominees. That is the real reason why they refuse to support a temporary replacement.

They are trying to make an age argument. Yet Grassley is 89 and he has not committed to retiring. Other republican senators have expressed support for him to stay. He has decide to November.

So this is just another move made by the opposition to delay. Why would it matter if another democrat temporarily replace her until she returns to work? Its similar to them denying Obama from making a nomination to the Supreme Court because he lost the election but still the president and can make that decision.

When something similar happen with Trump who had lost the election and then the republicans pushed those judicial nomination thru at the last hour.
It matters because then they can stuff the court full of their nominees. Otherwise they can't. That's so simple even you could understand it.
 
Your inability to rise above your politics is noted.
So you are claiming that you rise above your politics?

iu
 

Forum List

Back
Top