Avatar feed
Responses: 11
SP5 Robert Ruck
9
9
0
A low point for the Senate to attempt to block the appointment of a well qualified jurist to the Supreme Court. Just a few years ago he received a unanimous vote for his appointment to the Appeals Court. What is wrong with those people?
(9)
Comment
(0)
SP5 Robert Ruck
SP5 Robert Ruck
7 y
I was not being partisan. Both houses have been fighting over everything that comes up rather than working together to find solutions that would benefit the population as a whole. Instead of just screaming no at each other they should be looking for ways to agree on important issues. I try very hard not to get involved in partisan political discussions however once again when I try to make a neutral observation about the disfunction of our government as a whole people break down the comments to their own political beliefs. No more comments from me regarding any of this stuff. Believe what you wish about any of it.
(2)
Reply
(0)
MAJ James Woods
MAJ James Woods
7 y
PO1 John Crafton - And filibustering Gorsuch won't hurt the Dems in the same manner obstructing Garland didn't hurt the GOP. You're exactly right on both points.
(2)
Reply
(0)
MAJ James Woods
MAJ James Woods
7 y
SP5 Robert Ruck - Thanks for the neutral observation. Many can't see through the partisan propaganda and "who started it" arguments. All are to blame for the dysfunction of our government.
(2)
Reply
(0)
MAJ James Woods
MAJ James Woods
7 y
PO1 John Crafton - All it takes is one member of opposition to take an ethical stand against his/her own party challenging to follow the laws and rules of our government not party loyalty. Imagine a Republican Senator challenging his/her fellow Republicans we should hold hearings and challenge the nominee. Imagine a Democrat Senator challenging his/her fellow Dems, we held hearings, he's qualified, lets not filibuster. I'd have more respect for that then this partisan BS "With regret, I voted the way my party told me to vote". Ugh
(2)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
CSM William DeWolf
9
9
0
Awesome nomination and pick for the Associate Justice!
(9)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
MAJ James Woods
4
4
0
Garland was fully qualified. Stonewalled, obstructed and denied a hearing.
Gorsuch was fully qualified. Challenged during hearings and filibustered.
Americans should remember the last 14 months as an example in our history as to how our Congress should never behave when representing Americans.
(4)
Comment
(0)
SSgt Gary Andrews
SSgt Gary Andrews
7 y
Right you are, Major.......neither party has done us proud through this process.
(1)
Reply
(0)
MAJ James Woods
MAJ James Woods
7 y
Congress' job is to approve or reject a nominee. "Not consider" is not an option. You clearly do not understand the process and swallowed the same crap McConnell drooled out of his mouth.
(1)
Reply
(0)
SSgt Robert Marx
SSgt Robert Marx
7 y
MAJ James Woods - Sir, I would suggest that the U.S. Constitution does not forbid the Senate to do a sort of "pocket veto;" therefore, the Senate performed its constitutional duty by not even bringing up the nominee for consideration. The practice of polity within the Senate also gives the "Pro tem" leader of the Senate the right to schedule hearings on official duties so the lack of a hearing also passes the polity test. I surmise that your discontent could perhaps be "sour grapes."
(0)
Reply
(0)
MAJ James Woods
MAJ James Woods
7 y
SSgt Robert Marx did you just argue a loophole? Constitution doesn't forbid a sort of pocket veto? Nice way of demonstrating party loyalty takes precedence over American people and country. There is a vacancy. Senate's job is to fill that vacancy as soon as possible; not to pick and choose when it's convenient for one party whether GOP or Dem.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small

Join nearly 2 million former and current members of the US military, just like you.

close