The Loyal Opposition

[Undertoad]

Yeah, it was in response to "Spoken like a true privileged individual."

Are you not used to people actually responding to you when you think those words?

[xoxoxoBruce]

If I may interject, if not fuck you I will anyway. .
Cruise is extremely wealthy, has plenty of free time, has alienated plenty of movie ticket buyers with his connection to "The Cult". His chauffeur or one of his body guards may well be a publicity agent. Yes saying, ya know?

[glatt]

Do I have the timeline right? I'm just going from memory here, so please correct me where I am getting it wrong.

In the olden days, when I was a wee lad and before that, the Senate was a bit more above the political fray than the rest of politicians. They were respectable. when a President nominated a Supreme Court Justice, the Senate confirmed them because they were moderate nominees.

Sometime in the mid 80s or so, it must have been the elder Bush, nominated a guy named Bork. Bork was moderately conservative. The Democrats controlled the Senate, and they worked hard to block Bork. They succeeded and ushured in a new era of hardball politics with Supreme Court nominees. Why did the Democrats do this? Was a liberal justice being replaced by a conservative one and that was their objection? It must have been.

A decade or two went by, and opposing parties blocked more and more Presidential nominations at all levels of government. It came to a head early in Obama's first term when the Republican minority in the Senate refused to confirm any of his nominees and there was a historically large number of vacant seats throughout the courts and government and nominees not being placed in them.

So the Democrats, who controlled the Senate, went for the "nuclear option" for the lower court vacancies, and changed the Senate rules so that only a simple majority was needed. This stopped the Republicans from their obstruction, and a bunch of seats were filled. The Supreme court nomination process was not changed. A 2/3 majority vote was still needed there to block filibusters. But then a midterm election gave the Senate to the Republicans, and they resumed blocking Obama nominations.

Then a year ago, Scalia died, and President Obama nominated his replacement. That piece of shit, Mitch McConnell, refused to to even consider the nominee and the vacancy lasted for almost a year.
The Democrats are pissed that they didn't get to fill that seat, so they block the Trump pick. So McConnell, that piece of shit, blows up the remaining filibuster rules and the nominee will go through today.

That was a bit long winded, but the pattern I'm seeing is nothing new. These guys are getting worse and worse. They are not working for the good of the people. The way the system is supposed to work is that the president nominates people from his own party who are moderate enough to get votes from the other side. Everyone says they hate extremists, but they continue on the path of extremism.

I think looking back on it, the tipping point was the Bork nomination. That was when the tone changed.

[xoxoxoBruce]

He was a Reagan nominee. The Senate debate was televised and the public told their senate critters they did not want Bork. Especially after he said the biggest mistake the court had made was Brown vs the Board of Education.

But back to your point, yes that was the start of the obstructionism. Although I think the last one above the political fray was King George.