Bannon is a Nazi, and he has described himself as a "Leninist" in that he wants to completely tear down the system to rebuild his vision (ethnic nationalism) in its place.

 

LH is right when he says that this pick is what we could have expected out of a Jeb or Rubio or any other Republican.

Bannon is a Nazi, and he has described himself as a "Leninist" in that he wants to completely tear down the system to rebuild his vision (ethnic nationalism) in its place.

 

LH is right when he says that this pick is what we could have expected out of a Jeb or Rubio or any other Republican.

 

 

I know, it's just weird to hear. I also don't think he considers himself a Leninist. I saw the other day someone call him a Leninist Communist. No. He just liked how Lenin used a Vanguard party to tear an old system down. I'm sure outside of that he thinks Lenin was the devil.

 

 

I know, it's just weird to hear. I also don't think he considers himself a Leninist. I saw the other day someone call him a Leninist Communist. No. He just liked how Lenin used a Vanguard party to tear an old system down. I'm sure outside of that he thinks Lenin was the devil.

 

Right, he's not following Lenin's doctrine other than "smash the state and rebuild in your own vision." But I get LH's reference, and it provided the opportunity for a Simpsons Commie-Nazi reference, so ultimately I'm okay with it.

 

Bannon seems more like a combo of ethnic nationalism and anarcho-capitalism. Smash the entire state, rebuild a ~truly free~ society (non-whites need not apply).

Exactly.

 

If I'm the democrats, I make it clear - nominate Merrick Garland, and they will both confirm him AND promise no filibuster on any future nominee during Trump's 4 years. That puts things back to the way it should work, and pops the balloon on continued obstructionism.

 

This is really the only compromise Is going in ready to make.

 

Give us the moderate judge selected by the majority President and we'll play nice. If not, f*** off.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix...m=.e18905b3484e

 

The Democrats are in real danger of overplaying their hand right now

I know, it's just weird to hear. I also don't think he considers himself a Leninist. I saw the other day someone call him a Leninist Communist. No. He just liked how Lenin used a Vanguard party to tear an old system down. I'm sure outside of that he thinks Lenin was the devil.

 

Why let 'em in? Bannon explained his worldview well before it became official US policy

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/ban...m=.2ea890a6deba

 

I literally can't believe people fall for these arguments.

 

Scalia didn't die a week before the election, during the transition period afterwards. He died with nearly a full year remaining in Obama's term. Republicans said they were going to hold out through Clinton's term if she was elected too. It was 100% a power grab. The Constitution doesn't have a method of actually making the Senate do their job, so Republicans took advantage by not doing it. They successfully stole a SCOTUS seat.

It was done during the election cycle.

The Republicans said they would let the people decide.

So why is the distinction ok at 12 months but not 24?

 

Please lay out a rational argument for the difference. You aren't allowed to say "the court should be filled" when you had no issue whatsoever with the court remaining unfilled for a year.

I'll mention it a third time now, it happened during an election cycle.

Exactly.

 

If I'm the democrats, I make it clear - nominate Merrick Garland, and they will both confirm him AND promise no filibuster on any future nominee during Trump's 4 years. That puts things back to the way it should work, and pops the balloon on continued obstructionism.

What the Democrats are threatening is obstructionism. This isn't a point of negotiation and the Republicans need to finally grow a spine and stop bending to whatever the Democrats want like they did thru the eight years of President Obama and make a stand. Garland was not selected. Get over it.

Trump filed his candidacy for 2020 hours after his inauguration. I guess that means we're in an election cycle and he shouldn't get to choose?

 

This whole "in an election cycle" was something invented by Republicans to steal a SCOTUS seat.

 

What the Democrats are threatening is obstructionism. This isn't a point of negotiation and the Republicans need to finally grow a spine and stop bending to whatever the Democrats want like they did thru the eight years of President Obama and make a stand. Garland was not selected. Get over it.

 

We live in separate realities.

Edited February 1, 20179 yr by StrangeSox

Lmao. A crushing blow. They literally have nothing to lose.

 

They have been trying to play nice for the last 8 years. Now they should do everything they can to make it as hard as possible for this nut to put anyone on the Supreme court or any law passed.

 

The ones who don't should be primaried when they are up for election.

And with that strategy you'll see a super majority in the Houses of Congress for the Republicans. Go ahead and be obstructionists.

 

 

It was done during the election cycle.

 

It was almost an entire year out. "The election cycle" doesn't mean much of anything given that we have insanely long campaigns and election processes.

 

The Republicans said they would let the people decide.

 

The people decided who they wanted to nominate justices when they elected Obama in 2012.

 

Republicans also said they would block Clinton's nominees if she won, which contradicts that argument entirely.

Trump filed his candidacy for 2020 hours after his inauguration. I guess that means we're in an election cycle and he shouldn't get to choose?

 

This whole "in an election cycle" was something invented by Republicans to steal a SCOTUS seat.

 

 

 

We live in separate realities.

Denying what an election cycle is and using the term "steal" is a liberal coping mechanism. It's analogous with using the term abortion for murder.

Brett, do you honestly believe that the Republicans didn't engage in obstructionism over the past 8 years?

Republicans need to finally grow a spine and stop bending to whatever the Democrats want like they did thru the eight years of President Obama and make a stand.

 

Troll confirmed

It was almost an entire year out. "The election cycle" doesn't mean much of anything given that we have insanely long campaigns and election processes.

 

 

 

The people decided who they wanted to nominate justices when they elected Obama in 2012.

 

Republicans also said they would block Clinton's nominees if she won, which contradicts that argument entirely.

The election cycle is about a year. Sorry if you have issues with that.

The people were ready to allow the election process to decide. You'd have no issues if it were Hillary.

Republicans said they would let the election decide. Show the evidence of mass folks saying if Hillary won they'd let the seat remain vacant.

I won't stop breathing.

 

 

Brett, do you honestly believe that the Republicans didn't engage in obstructionism over the past 8 years?

Do you honestly believe they didn't bend many. many times? (to help you answer see "Power of the Purse"

Troll confirmed

If that is what you are confessing to, my hats off to you.

Has there ever been another example like Obama's where the current president wasn't allowed to fill a vacancy? That seemed extremely odd.

If that is what you are confessing to, my hats off to you.

 

You played the part of "hyper-partisan Republican" well for a while, but you pushed it a little too far, flew a little too close to the sun and outed yourself.

The Republicans did what the Democrats refuse to and that is let the people decide. The people elected the President that made it perfectly clear he would replace the spot with an Originalist. If the people would have elected Hillary, we'd have the hearing on Garland. As such, if the Democrats really do try and filibuster this, it's going to turn off much of America and could be a crushing blow to the Democratic party.

 

As with Obama and ruling by fiat on the Executive Order, the Republicans opened this door. If they Democrats use it, the GOP has no one to blame but themselves.

Denying what an election cycle is and using the term "steal" is a liberal coping mechanism. It's analogous with using the term abortion for murder.

I stay out of these threads for the most part but holy f*** this s*** is annoying.

It was done during the election cycle.

The Republicans said they would let the people decide.

 

This is the dumbest reason yet. It is a cycle, which means it is always going on in some stage. A cycle, by definition, is a never ending circle.

I stay out of these threads for the most part but holy f*** this s*** is annoying.

 

It's troll bait. Ignore it.

What the Democrats are threatening is obstructionism. This isn't a point of negotiation and the Republicans need to finally grow a spine and stop bending to whatever the Democrats want like they did thru the eight years of President Obama and make a stand. Garland was not selected. Get over it.

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

 

You don't actually believe the Dems are obstructing here, but that the GOP wasn't with Garland. You know 100% it's both, but are unwilling to acknowledge it. I refuse to believe you are so blinded by partisan bias to actually believe it's only this (possible) Dem action that would be obstruction.