RIP Antonin Scalia

I have linked to stories in which her classmates are quoted. I have challenged you

And, again, there have been 200 screechfest books written about Hillary claiming she's everything from an alien to Ivanka Trump's trans gender lesbian lover.

If these high school classmates were just waiting to unload on her, they would have found them. So show me what they've uncovered.

Theory? Like most goody goods at the top of their class, Hillary probably was well-liked and admired by her classmates.

 

She was probably a milquetoast dweeb, like most aspiring politicians.

 

Hey, it just occurred to me that I have a person for YF. My wife, Alice. She worked as an office menial of some kind for the Children's Defense Fund when she got out of college and felt Hillary Rodham had a bad habit of big-timing the office staff. This criticism, however, has not prevented her from voting for Clinton in the 2008 and 2016 Mass. presidential primaries.

 

Do you have an example of someone suggesting she's a pragmatic centrist (like me, for example) who is also "sending out warnings" that she will select some radical leftist? Now, I could easily see her selecting someone younger and less male and less white, but I don't for a second see her selecting a leftist. It would be out of character.

 

And his attempt to scold Obama and by telling the American people that Obama is cynically playing politics with this nomination is laughable.

If he is, it's because you started the game.

Who do these people think they are fooling?

 

In 1 Tweet, Republican Senator PROVES GOP’s SCOTUS Obstruction Is Just Partisan F*ckery (SCREENSHOTS)
Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.) tweets "Should Merrick Garland be nominated again by the next president. I would be happy to carefully consider his nomination"
So Sen. Toomey, if he's good enough for you to consider in the future, why isn't he good enough for you to consider now?

 

You can disagree with the stand, but it's not inconsistent with anything they've said previously.

It's not about the particular nominee.

 

Because unbeknownst to "the voters," they apparently only authorized Obama to be their president for seven years of an eight-year presidency as it pertains to SCOTUS nominations.

 

I know there's nothing in the Constitution that says how long they have to advise and consent on the president's nomination and they're going to drag that out until someone else gets the pick, but it still pisses me off to see them just flat out say "we'll consider him if the next president nominates him, but we won't consider him now"

 

And I don't even mind them doing that if they admit it. Stop trying to sell it as though you are trying to protect the rights of American citizens to select a Supreme Court justice.

 

You'd rather they lie?

 

I'd rather they not be derelict assholes.