(Democrats) obstructionism and hypocrisy

[Klartext89]

1. As you know, Trump still (11 days after Inauguration!) has only two cabinet members confirmed because of delay tactics by Senate Democrats. Obama got nearly his full cabinet in the first week (7 on day one!). Remember when Democrats blasted Republicans for obstructionism?

2. Some Senate Democrats also don't even know who the President picks for SCOTUS and are already calling for a Filibuster. Remember when Democrats called Republicans out for playing with the Filibuster - and not even making problems with out of the mainstream Justices Sotomayor and Kagan?

3. Obama used the Executive Order ("only need a pen and a phone") like no one before. Democrats celebrated it and are now outraged about Trump using it as well.

Honestly, as a non-US-citizen, do you think this hypocrisy, obstructionism and "payback" is good for the country and for US Politics?
I think everyone remembers the outrage

[pbrower2a]

Obstruction of tyranny is a noble cause.

[7,052,770]

3. Obama used the Executive Order ("only need a pen and a phone") like no one before.

Trying to decide whether you really don't know that Obama used fewer Executive Orders than any recent president, or if you do know that and you're just trolling around.

If it's the former, it's ok - lots of longtime posters here have apparently forgotten that fact over the last month.

[Klartext89]

Obstruction of tyranny is a noble cause.

Yeah I know. Everyone disagreeing with you guys is a "tyrann" etc. Grow up.

[Klartext89]

3. Obama used the Executive Order ("only need a pen and a phone") like no one before.

Trying to decide whether you really don't know that Obama used fewer Executive Orders than any recent president, or if you do know that and you're just trolling around.

If it's the former, it's ok - lots of longtime posters here have apparently forgotten that fact over the last month.

He used less non-important executive orders and used way more de facto bills/laws ex orders.

[Person Man]

Democrats can't not obstruct.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

Yeah it's wrong but at the end of the day Americans don't care.

[Rob Bloom]

2. Some Senate Democrats also don't even know who the President picks for SCOTUS and are already calling for a Filibuster. Remember when Democrats called Republicans out for playing with the Filibuster - and not even making problems with out of the mainstream Justices Sotomayor and Kagan?

Of course you deliberately fail to mention Merrick Garland. By denying President Obama his right to pick a (very moderate) nominee for SCOTUS a full year before the end of his term, every GOP Senator involved (and all supporters with a blue avatar) has forever forfeited the right to call out Democrats for obstructionism!

[Hindsight was 2020]

On point #1 maybe it's because Obama!s cabinet picks weren't Ben Carson or Rex Tillerson

[Incipimus iterum]

What I consider the biggest hypocrisy is the republicans tolerating Trumps liberal use of executive orders. This is the same party that tried to sue Obama for doing the same thing.

[The_Doctor]

The GOP made it a model to obstruct Obama. Is anyone shocked the Democrats took the next step? After Garland, the 2009 Stimulus, ObamaCare, the judges, whatever, nobody should be shocked the opposition party is doubling down. As norms get broken and things get steadily more partisan, we shouldn't be shocked.

Please save your crocodile tears. In eight years when the Democrats take over, you'll call it "noble resistance to tyranny."

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

Yes, the hypocrisy is from American NazisRepublicans suddenly upset that the tactics they used for years are now turned against their orange cult-leader. It's hilarious.  

Who would have thought a month ago that we'd be seeing so much impotent rage and tears from Pussygrabber's cult?

P.S. I hear whining and throwing tantrums on twitter is how Real Men (tm) govern.

Roflamo.

[Chief Justice Keef]

Cry more while I drink your tears from my #ConservativeTears mug!!!!

[Mr. Reactionary]

Obstruction of tyranny is a noble cause.

True story Glenn Beck.

[Klartext89]

2. Some Senate Democrats also don't even know who the President picks for SCOTUS and are already calling for a Filibuster. Remember when Democrats called Republicans out for playing with the Filibuster - and not even making problems with out of the mainstream Justices Sotomayor and Kagan?

Of course you deliberately fail to mention Merrick Garland. By denying President Obama his right to pick a (very moderate) nominee for SCOTUS a full year before the end of his term, every GOP Senator involved (and all supporters with a blue avatar) has forever forfeited the right to call out Democrats for obstructionism!

Merrick Garland was way more qualified than Sotomajor or Kagan. Why didn't Obama nominate him instead of these political hecks?

It's also the right of the Senate to deny a nomination. Ask the Dems, they did it multiple times before with Reagan, Nixon etc.

I don't justify the Senate GOP (I would have voted Garland down instead of not consider him), but it's hillarious that the Dems who started SCOTUS fights long ago and never got a liberal nomination crushed before are crying. But I guess it's ok if the Dems do it ;-)

[ApatheticAustrian]

after watching this election result after 6 years of gridlock, my sense of fairness died

let mcconnell do away with the filibuster and be done with it.

[Klartext89]

Yes, the hypocrisy is from American NazisRepublicans suddenly upset that the tactics they used for years are now turned against their orange cult-leader. It's hilarious.  

Who would have thought a month ago that we'd be seeing so much impotent rage and tears from Pussygrabber's cult?

P.S. I hear whining and throwing tantrums on twitter is how Real Men (tm) govern.

Roflamo.

Grew up.

[Gass3268]

after watching this election result after 6 years of gridlock, my sense of fairness died

let mcconnell do away with the filibuster and be done with it.

He doesn't have the votes right now to do it.

[Klartext89]

after watching this election result after 6 years of gridlock, my sense of fairness died

let mcconnell do away with the filibuster and be done with it.

I agree. The GOP never used the Filibuster for SCOTUS, so why keeping it when being in the majority (and if they play it right, they will get a Senate majority for years to come).

[Cashew]

There is a big difference between retaliation and hypocrisy.

[Cashew]

after watching this election result after 6 years of gridlock, my sense of fairness died

let mcconnell do away with the filibuster and be done with it.

He doesn't have the votes right now to do it.

Mccain, Graham, Rubin bashed Tillerson for weeks, and they caved anyway.

What makes you think this is any different.

[Xing]

There is a big difference between retaliation and hypocrisy.

This, and if the Democrats are hypocrites, so are the Republicans who whine about obstructionism.

[Virginiá]

I don't justify the Senate GOP (I would have voted Garland down instead of not consider him), but it's hillarious that the Dems who started SCOTUS fights long ago and never got a liberal nomination crushed before are crying. But I guess it's ok if the Dems do it ;-)

What, you think denying one of a president's nominee (but confirming another choice) in itself is grounds for total future obstruction? Democrats never denied Republicans a seat on the court just so they could hold out and try to fill it themselves. Maybe Democrats blocked some nominees they found too ideological or otherwise controversial, but they still let someone in. Also take for instance Clarence Thomas, the most conservative member of the court, who was still eventually approved in 1992 despite Democrats having a large Senate majority.

If you want to argue that Republicans are justified in making for nasty SCOTUS confirmation fights, then fine. But Republicans were never justified in blockading a seat for a year just so they could steal the nomination from a Democratic president. There is no way for you to justify that.

Further, I don't even know why you would want to. It's in everyone's best interests to have a Senate that continues to adhere to various traditions. Republicans won't always control it, and now people like Mitch have ensured that the future of judicial nominations remain a hyper-partisan affair where each party refuses to seat the other party's nominees just so they can keep the seats for themselves.

Great f'ing job.

[The_Doctor]

I don't think the Right understands the Senate majority is tenuous and can shift. Or that the country can flee Trump at warp speed. On of the two, or really, both.

[Hindsight was 2020]

I don't think the Right understands the Senate majority is tenuous and can shift. Or that the country can flee Trump at warp speed. On of the two, or really, both.

They don't they are convinced they are "real American" and the dems are a dead party. You'd think after the dems thought the same and were shown wrong they'd be more worried but nope