NYT Tries To Go U.S.Constitutional



Opinion/Editorial

  Here they come in their own mind once again all of the sudden the left wing self righteous New York Times editorial board are now experts in something that they cannot properly interpret,comprehend or understand the U.S. Constitution. I know what you are thinking I am LMAO and trying not to spill my coffee from laughing so hard.
 The title of this OPED from the NYT is "Filibustering Nominees Must End" this morning.This is where it gets good starting off when the NYT tells the US senate what to do "The system for reviewing presidential appointments is broken. The Senate has a constitutional duty to provide advice and consent on the naming of judges and high-ranking executive branch officials. But the process has been hijacked by cynical partisanship and cheap tricks.This is not a new problem, but it has gotten intolerably worse and is now threatening to paralyze government, as Republicans use the filibuster to try to kill off agencies they do not like. The number of unfilled judicial seats is nearing a historic high.It is time to end the ability of a single senator, or group of senators, to block the confirmation process by threatening a filibuster, which can be overcome only by the vote of 60 senators. We agree with President Obama’s call in the State of the Union address for the Senate to change its rules and require votes on judicial and executive nominees within 90 days."
 Hello NYT are not your buddies in the Democrat party in the majority in the US Senate or not?Filibustering is part of the process now all of the sudden a change in heart Gee I wonder why?
 Oh wait here is the answer "This is a major change of position for us, and we came to it reluctantly. The filibuster has sometimes been the only way to deny life terms on the federal bench to extremist or unqualified judges. But the paralysis has become so dire that we see no other solution."
 Yeah this is their idea of sticking the moistened finger outside on a windy day to see which way the political winds are blowing.No NYT just nominees who you deem unqualified or extremists which are those common sense thinking people who interpret the Constitution as the founders intended.
 Here is a good example of the NYT not understanding the Constitution "Senate Republicans then blocked the confirmation vote for Richard Cordray, a strong pro-consumer leader and the bureau’s chief of enforcement. Mr. Obama gave Mr. Cordray a recess appointment, which means he will be able to serve only until the end of 2013."
 Here is the problem the US Senate was not in a recess and it was reported everywhere but hey its the NYT! Once again the NYT has a hard time dealing with the FACTS!