The Duke
Diamond Member
- Jul 30, 2022
- 36,978
- 47,258
- 2,788
I'm sorry about that.
That's probably over 300 lbs though, so I ain't mad at ya.
What the hell is wrong with us?!
- Thread starter Remodeling Maidiac
- Start date
That's probably over 300 lbs though, so I ain't mad at ya.
Independent thinker
Diamond Member
- Oct 15, 2015
- 31,562
- 27,329
- 2,788
I don't see what difference it really makes between an old hag mummy voting blue or a younger agile dummy voting blue.
MarathonMike
Diamond Member
Term limits? How about vegetable limits?
progressive hunter
Diamond Member
- Dec 11, 2018
- 67,845
- 42,662
- 2,615
if george bush can ban broccoli from the whitehouse we can ban turnips from congress,,
Mikeoxenormous
Diamond Member
When your voting base are drug zombies, you can be any age and stay in power.
Mikeoxenormous
Diamond Member
Expiration dates........Throw away after 06/30/2020
g5000
Diamond Member
- Nov 26, 2011
- 131,613
- 75,684
- 2,605
Feinstein is not a boomer. She was born during the Great Depression.
So was Senator Grassley.
g5000
Diamond Member
- Nov 26, 2011
- 131,613
- 75,684
- 2,605
One does have to wonder what Feinstein is gaining from sticking around the assisted living facility known as "The Senate".
There is some kind of ulterior motive which goes beyond the title.
progressive hunter
Diamond Member
- Dec 11, 2018
- 67,845
- 42,662
- 2,615
its a perfect example of party over country,,
progressive hunter
Diamond Member
- Dec 11, 2018
- 67,845
- 42,662
- 2,615
theres clips of fienstien in this
g5000
Diamond Member
- Nov 26, 2011
- 131,613
- 75,684
- 2,605
I think she is benefitting financially somehow.
Her replacement would be another Democrat appointed by the Democratic governor of California, so it isn't about party.
leftwinger
Diamond Member
progressive hunter
Diamond Member
- Dec 11, 2018
- 67,845
- 42,662
- 2,615
tell me how a mindless mass of a human benefits from money,,,
fact is the party will keep her there as long as possible mainly because shes easy to control as we see from her assistant just telling her what to say,,
where are the people in her life that love and care about her??
g5000
Diamond Member
- Nov 26, 2011
- 131,613
- 75,684
- 2,605
A pondering on Feinstein's motive:
time.com
Here’s an updated take that will undoubtedly draw some objections: Feinstein holding the seat until the election next year may be the most responsible thing she can do in case of one possible, albeit unlikely, scenario: a vacancy on the Supreme Court. In indulging her stubbornness, her ego, her paranoia—whatever we want to call it—Feinstein may be what stands between a 6-to-3 conservative Supreme Court majority tilting to a 7-to-2 position, or the key to it shifting back to 5-4. Either of those outcomes would be one liberals may regret not having taken more seriously.
The reason why Feinstein holds all this power is tied to her seat on the Senate Judiciary Committee. Democrats have an 11-to-10 advantage over Republicans on the panel, giving them zero margin for error in advancing President Joe Biden’s nominees for lifetime appointments to federal courts, including the Supreme Court. A tied 10-to-10 vote, at least under the current rules, leaves those nominees potentially stuck in limbo. Whenever she’s absent, Feinstein leaves Democrats on the committee with an insufficient 10 votes.
So one might argue that all that is more reason for Feinstein to resign, and let a younger, healthier Democrat take over her spot on the committee. But that’s not what would be guaranteed to happen. Even if Feinstein were to leave her seat early, allowing California Gov. Gavin Newsom to appoint an interim lawmaker until after the 2024 election, there is nothing ensuring that that successor could be the 11th vote on Judiciary. Committee assignments are part of the start of every Congress, and changes are subject to 60 votes if some lawmakers object and demand a recorded vote. That means 10 Republicans would have to allow Democrats to either send Feinstein’s replacement or another lawmaker into that role. There is scant evidence that Republicans would accede to that request.
Need proof? In April, the Senate considered Feinstein’s request that she be allowed to step away from Judiciary for a beat, and to allow another Democrat to take her seat. The effort, clearly heading to defeat, wasn’t even put to a floor vote. Even in a body known for its cordiality across party lines, Republicans saw the ability to confirm nominees to lifetime gigs in robes and wielding gavels as more important than courtesy to an ailing colleague. “We’re not going to help the Democrats with that,” Republican Sen. Joni Ernst of Iowa said.
In Defense of Dianne Feinstein Not Quitting (No, Really)
Liberals calling for the ailing Dianne Feinstein to quit haven't considered what that would mean for one possible, albeit unlikely, scenario: a vacancy on the Supreme Court
Here’s an updated take that will undoubtedly draw some objections: Feinstein holding the seat until the election next year may be the most responsible thing she can do in case of one possible, albeit unlikely, scenario: a vacancy on the Supreme Court. In indulging her stubbornness, her ego, her paranoia—whatever we want to call it—Feinstein may be what stands between a 6-to-3 conservative Supreme Court majority tilting to a 7-to-2 position, or the key to it shifting back to 5-4. Either of those outcomes would be one liberals may regret not having taken more seriously.
The reason why Feinstein holds all this power is tied to her seat on the Senate Judiciary Committee. Democrats have an 11-to-10 advantage over Republicans on the panel, giving them zero margin for error in advancing President Joe Biden’s nominees for lifetime appointments to federal courts, including the Supreme Court. A tied 10-to-10 vote, at least under the current rules, leaves those nominees potentially stuck in limbo. Whenever she’s absent, Feinstein leaves Democrats on the committee with an insufficient 10 votes.
So one might argue that all that is more reason for Feinstein to resign, and let a younger, healthier Democrat take over her spot on the committee. But that’s not what would be guaranteed to happen. Even if Feinstein were to leave her seat early, allowing California Gov. Gavin Newsom to appoint an interim lawmaker until after the 2024 election, there is nothing ensuring that that successor could be the 11th vote on Judiciary. Committee assignments are part of the start of every Congress, and changes are subject to 60 votes if some lawmakers object and demand a recorded vote. That means 10 Republicans would have to allow Democrats to either send Feinstein’s replacement or another lawmaker into that role. There is scant evidence that Republicans would accede to that request.
Need proof? In April, the Senate considered Feinstein’s request that she be allowed to step away from Judiciary for a beat, and to allow another Democrat to take her seat. The effort, clearly heading to defeat, wasn’t even put to a floor vote. Even in a body known for its cordiality across party lines, Republicans saw the ability to confirm nominees to lifetime gigs in robes and wielding gavels as more important than courtesy to an ailing colleague. “We’re not going to help the Democrats with that,” Republican Sen. Joni Ernst of Iowa said.
progressive hunter
Diamond Member
- Dec 11, 2018
- 67,845
- 42,662
- 2,615
party over country,,A pondering on Feinstein's motive:
In Defense of Dianne Feinstein Not Quitting (No, Really)
Liberals calling for the ailing Dianne Feinstein to quit haven't considered what that would mean for one possible, albeit unlikely, scenario: a vacancy on the Supreme Court
Here’s an updated take that will undoubtedly draw some objections: Feinstein holding the seat until the election next year may be the most responsible thing she can do in case of one possible, albeit unlikely, scenario: a vacancy on the Supreme Court. In indulging her stubbornness, her ego, her paranoia—whatever we want to call it—Feinstein may be what stands between a 6-to-3 conservative Supreme Court majority tilting to a 7-to-2 position, or the key to it shifting back to 5-4. Either of those outcomes would be one liberals may regret not having taken more seriously.
The reason why Feinstein holds all this power is tied to her seat on the Senate Judiciary Committee. Democrats have an 11-to-10 advantage over Republicans on the panel, giving them zero margin for error in advancing President Joe Biden’s nominees for lifetime appointments to federal courts, including the Supreme Court. A tied 10-to-10 vote, at least under the current rules, leaves those nominees potentially stuck in limbo. Whenever she’s absent, Feinstein leaves Democrats on the committee with an insufficient 10 votes.
So one might argue that all that is more reason for Feinstein to resign, and let a younger, healthier Democrat take over her spot on the committee. But that’s not what would be guaranteed to happen. Even if Feinstein were to leave her seat early, allowing California Gov. Gavin Newsom to appoint an interim lawmaker until after the 2024 election, there is nothing ensuring that that successor could be the 11th vote on Judiciary. Committee assignments are part of the start of every Congress, and changes are subject to 60 votes if some lawmakers object and demand a recorded vote. That means 10 Republicans would have to allow Democrats to either send Feinstein’s replacement or another lawmaker into that role. There is scant evidence that Republicans would accede to that request.
Need proof? In April, the Senate considered Feinstein’s request that she be allowed to step away from Judiciary for a beat, and to allow another Democrat to take her seat. The effort, clearly heading to defeat, wasn’t even put to a floor vote. Even in a body known for its cordiality across party lines, Republicans saw the ability to confirm nominees to lifetime gigs in robes and wielding gavels as more important than courtesy to an ailing colleague. “We’re not going to help the Democrats with that,” Republican Sen. Joni Ernst of Iowa said.
You forgot Grassley...and Trump.
Hey, just us stuck in our two party system that rewards politicians who just don't know when to hang up the towel and pass the torch.
g5000
Diamond Member
- Nov 26, 2011
- 131,613
- 75,684
- 2,605
Both parties are putting themselves above the country. The Republicans are blocking a replacement for Feinstein on the Judiciary Committee.
CrusaderFrank
Diamond Member
- May 20, 2009
- 153,082
- 78,305
- 2,645
Commercial for term limits: 2 terms, no stock trading
progressive hunter
Diamond Member
- Dec 11, 2018
- 67,845
- 42,662
- 2,615
exactly,, thats why singling out one while ignoring the other tells us which party you shill for,,,
I myself think both major parties should be declared terrorist organizations and banned from US politics,, also be stripped of all their money and go directly towards the debt,,
CrusaderFrank
Diamond Member
- May 20, 2009
- 153,082
- 78,305
- 2,645
Fetterman is no improvement
Similar threads
New Topics
-
[Columbia U] Mahmoud Khalil/Joseph Massad's "bibol" of 'balestine'- Started by Sayaras
- Replies: 0
-
-
-
-
