Federal Judiciary
Woman: What happened to just a simple blindfold?
Man: With all holds, tie-ups and filibusters of judges, it seemed time for an update.
You are correct. It is quite easy to determine who is on whose side. That goes for both sides.
The deciding (unexpected) vote on Obamacare being a “tax” was conservative John Roberts. I guess they’re not 100% predictable. But I think you’re missing the point of the ’toon. I invite you to see my next post for a different interpretation.
Repubs: “If you won’t change the filibuster (= minority rule) rules, we won’t stand in the way of your judicial nominees.”
Dems: “Okay. It’s a deal.”
Repubs: “Psych.”
Again, just yesterday. The General District Court in the DC district has 3 – count ’em, 3- vacancies. The vote to fill one of them was 56-41. No stated objections, but 41 votes beats 56 every time in Republican math.
feverjr Premium Member over 10 years ago
And who could forget Bush v Gore?
I Play One On TV over 10 years ago
You are correct. It is quite easy to determine who is on whose side. That goes for both sides.
The deciding (unexpected) vote on Obamacare being a “tax” was conservative John Roberts. I guess they’re not 100% predictable. But I think you’re missing the point of the ’toon. I invite you to see my next post for a different interpretation.
I Play One On TV over 10 years ago
Repubs: “If you won’t change the filibuster (= minority rule) rules, we won’t stand in the way of your judicial nominees.”
Dems: “Okay. It’s a deal.”
Repubs: “Psych.”
Again, just yesterday. The General District Court in the DC district has 3 – count ’em, 3- vacancies. The vote to fill one of them was 56-41. No stated objections, but 41 votes beats 56 every time in Republican math.
Same stuff, different day.
pirate227 over 10 years ago
Nailed it.