Monday, October 31, 2005

Nuke the Bastards!



If the Demoncraps try to fillibuster Alito, NUKE EM!

7 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

wait a second....i'm a democrat...can't you just draw and quarter us, or maybe a good old fashioned disembowelment? oh, i know, i know, how about a good stern talkin' to? aren't you afraid a nuke might just get some nasty radiation on your core consitituency? well, if you'll excuse me, I've got some posters of Chairman Mao to hang up around my living room, but first I'm going to fornicate with a giant redwood.

October 31, 2005 6:48 PM  
Anonymous Rorschach said...

I was referring to the "nuclear option" that senate democrats got all hot and bothered about. (the Republicans like to call it the "constitutional option" to avoid scaring the stupid people who crap thier drawers every time the word nuclear is used...)

Be careful, redwood splinters are difficult to remove....

November 01, 2005 8:25 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

looks like your base is gettin' rev'd up for a fight...

hehehe

we might have the crazy hippies on our side, but at least we don't have these guys. ;-)

November 01, 2005 10:20 AM  
Anonymous Rorschach said...

I'm not sure where that link was supposed to go, it certainly doesn't work for me. But yes, The Democrats had better crawl under a rock on this or they are going to get pounded into the dirt. The right is going to shove this one through come hell or high water. The Democrats can stand up proud and get steamrolled, or they can save thier ammo for another fight because this one is a looser for them. If I were a Democrat, I'd be thinking discretion is the better part of valor here.

November 01, 2005 10:57 AM  
Anonymous Leland said...

I would love to say, "Here Here on using the Nuclear Option", but then again, we almost got stuck with Harriet Miers. Alas, that process worked as it should have.

November 02, 2005 10:04 AM  
Anonymous Rorschach said...

leland, IMHO, Meirs failed not because the Democrats didn't like her (most actually did), it failed becase the Republicans thought she was a very poor choice and we raised enough hell to make Bush rethink his choice. He was going for a stealth nominee that had no documented track record to give the Democrats a handhold to drag her down. And I can see why he was thinking that way. The problem was she HAD gone on record on a few things and they weren't as conservative as we liked. We have been fooled before with Souter. we were not prepared to take the risk that Meirs would turn out similarly. We wanted a sure thing and in Alito, we got it. now that a number of the Gang of 14 have stated that they would vote to end the filibuster rule if one were attempted is proof that even the Gang of 14 have realized just how pissed off the republican base has become over this. after we get this dealt with, the next step is immigration reform and not this "amnesty-lite" idea that Bush has come up with. Hell, dropping one on Mexico City would be fine with me.

November 02, 2005 11:11 AM  
Anonymous Leland said...

In short, the "cronyism" that was Harriet Miers is, IMHO, the whole point of the Senate "advise and consent" role. Because I really disliked the President's choice, I preferred the stiffer rules.

However, I'm more the consitutionalist, so I consider the "Nuclear Option" to be nothing more than running the Senate as the framers intended.

By the way, I share the your humble opinion on why Harriet Miers nomination failed.

November 03, 2005 2:21 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home