I was struck yesterday by how bluntly @GrahamBlog laid out the state of judicial nomination politics:http://www.buzzfeed.com/chrisgeidner/lindsey-graham-warns-of-consequences-if-gop-blocks-obama-cou#.wczPpyEKR5 …
-
-
Replying to @chrisgeidner
Yes, there was _some_ partisanship in his focus on the Dems' filibuster rule change and not the GOP intransigence that preceded it.
1 reply 1 retweet 0 likes -
Replying to @chrisgeidner
But he also attacked his side: "I’ll be fighting talk radio when somebody on my side puts up a nutjob—& they will." http://www.buzzfeed.com/chrisgeidner/lindsey-graham-warns-of-consequences-if-gop-blocks-obama-cou#.wczPpyEKR5 …
2 replies 5 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @chrisgeidner
Graham laid out how the end of the filibuster for lower court nominees eliminated the need to consult the other party on nominations.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @chrisgeidner
He talked about how _that_ means it's the extremes of each caucus "dar[ing] somebody in the conference to vote against that person."
1 reply 2 retweets 1 like
And, finally, Graham warned the same rule change is inevitably going to come for Supreme Court nominees — a development he would "hate."
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.