When it comes to giving in to the Democrats on allowing Obama to replace Alito, I say “F them!”
Why should we care about what Democrats think. We know Obama would appoint the most anti-America, radical Leftist he can find, and we are firmly AGAINST that.
They have never, repeat NEVER done us any favors, so what could we possibly gain? NOTHING.
As Front Page reports, the Democrats have held up our judicial appointments for years.
In previous posts, I discussed some of the outrageous Senate shenanigans by Democrats during the Bush years. Like blocking Judge Owens for 4 years. And holding one seat hostage for six years through three nominees.
Bush had nominated Judge Pickering in ’01 and he was blocked in committee, falsely smeared as a racist and then filibustered by Senate Democrats to deny him the “up and down vote” that they are now busy clamoring for. After three years, Pickering gave up and was replaced by Wallace, who was also blocked by Senate Democrats for a year and denied a vote. Six years later, Bush was still trying with Judge Southwick who had served in Iraq. He was also denied an “up and down” vote until the end of 2007.
If you thought six years was bad, Senate Democrats actually kept one seat vacant throughout Bush’s entire two terms so that Obama could renominate a Clinton nominee.
After Judge Murnaghan, a liberal judge on the Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit, died, Clinton’s attempt to fill the seat fell afoul of the Thurmond Rule, supported by both Democrats and Republicans, against judicial nominations in the last months of an election year. Murnaghan had died in August 2000. The election was a few months away. Under the Thurmond Rule, this would be Bush’s seat to fill.