Discussion for article #246062
I always suspected that this man was an idiot. Now I am sure!!!
"âThe president has tried everything he can to empower the executive branch at the expense of the legislative one,â Maybe if you guys had decide to do you jobs he would have taken any executive actions. But nope why break record as the most do nothing Congress in our history.
Ryan: We will not be doing our job if we didnât obstruct everything that Obama does. Obama expects obstruction and we are merely doing what he expects us to do.
The party of government doesnât work doesnât work. Stop paying the asshats.
anybody tired of the âits them not us who are radicalsââŚ?
Well, yes. They have âadvise and consentâ. If the pick is inappropriate, they have the right to withhold their consent.
BUTâŚitâs not advise and Fuck Off.
They donât have the right to not confirm any nominee whatsoever.
Youâre wrong, brah.
Itâs ok not to confirm. But you do have to hold hearings. The Kim Davis-ization of the GOP continues apace. âDoing my job conflicts with my values so just pay to not do my job.â
Ryan, you clown⌠why donât you quote the bit in the Constitution where it says the President is elected for a 3-year term?
No, you donât, shithead.
Well, add another WING-NUT the jar.
TEAM CABALâŚRepublics are TRAITORS.
It seems they have gone from âObama should not nominate anyone, and if he does, we will not hold any confirmation voteâ to âwell, weâre going to take it one step at a time, and of course we might vote to reject his nomineeâ in ONE DAY.
No one is arguing that the Senate (not Congress) has a right not to confirm a nominee. The argument is whether this process should go on in an election year. Given the fact that the election cycle begins the minute a President is sworn in, the argument can be made that no nominee should be put forward because you are always in an election cycle.
Rep. Ryan, if you state that you must accompany it with the foundation for the suggested so-called âright.â Failing that, it doesnât exist. Added hint: read the ConstitutionâŚ
Yes, Congressional Republicans have every ârightâ to shoot themselves in the foot by demonstrating their ineptitude at governing. It doesnât say so in the Constitution, but Republicans draw their ultimate authority from God, and He lets us fuck up as we will.
Of course, itâs the Senate that confirms SCOTUS nominees, not âCongressâ or the House of Representatives of which Ryan is speaker, but whatevs.
Translation: âWe canât confirm a PBO nomineeâany nominee-- with the Trump and Cruz Show running roughshod over our sacks.â
Sure, Congress has the ârightâ to do nothing on almost any subject. Once every year or so Republicans make a big deal about how they have a right not to authorize borrowing to pay the bills that it was their right to incur with the budget they passed.
Itâs really interesting watching these guys try to whip themselves up into a hype so big that they can ride it all the way through to next January. Itâs like watching a fat guy wearing a t-shirt from a 5K race he ran ten years ago trying to psych himself up at the start of a marathon. Good luck with that, fella!
This begs the question, would Republicans in Congress support a constitutional amendment stripping the President of the authority to make appointments during election years? If they really believe this is the way the system should work, letâs go ahead and make it official.
No, you are not forced to confirm any nominee. However, the Senate does have a sworn duty to provide advice and consent so that the position can be filled. I am involved in hiring decisions at my workplace as well. I am not required to give any particular candidate a thumbs-up. However, if I refuse to interview any of them because Iâm hoping that the HR department gets gutted and replaced a year from now, I will be fired.
You also have a sworn duty to look after the good of the country, and having a deadlock-prone SCOTUS for a year just to fulfill your masturbatory fantasy power trip is not in the best interest of the country at all; but, of course, we crossed that particular bridge in the House several years ago so I guess that is a moot point.