titans&bucs&bearsohmy! 2,745 Posted February 14, 2016 Liberals have been waiting for this day for years. It'll be interesting to see how it plays out. I'm guessing Obummer probably nominates the Indian guy from the DC Court that won unanimous approval a few years back, see what MCConnell does with it. I'm just glad I don't have to listen to the torrent of butthurt about it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Voltaire 5,458 Posted February 14, 2016 Gary, when I was eight, I begged to stay up late to color in the map in my weekly reader with my red and blue crayon. I majored in political science in college. I had a party for the 2000 election that had guests still there two days later. I say this to point out that politics used to be very very important to me. I like you. I find your politics insane, but you are a good man. I would like to give a bit of advice. Advice I followed during the bush years. Take a breath. Step back. Live your life and don't let crap beyond your control in Washington do that to you. Find the joy around you and ignore the garbage in the media. All it is is a three ring circus to create the illusion that we are still a republic anyway. The Republican Party I grew up with was fiscally responsible (mostly, that Laffer dillweed's theories were gathering strength). The Dems have always consistently sucked. I use to care about this stuff deeply too. We've had fifteen straight years of presidents who don't care about balancing the budget with another five years on tap. I thought fiscal irresponsibility would collapse the government like a house of cards, instead it seems to slowly deflate like a balloon I blow up for my daughter three days later that still has air in it but isn't worth playing with. The US has hidden strength that can overcome a lot and is more resilient than I gave it credit for. The Wile E. Coyote looking down moment hasn't occurred yet. At least Gary still has a party invested in his world view. John Kasich is all that's left of politicians that share mine. In Michigan, we're fortunate to have Snyder but he's being hammered on this Flint water fiasco. I just sit here overseas being all gloomy and stuff but still fascinated by it all. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KSB2424 3,172 Posted February 14, 2016 The man just died. Had 9 kids and 36 grandkids. Like him or not he served America. I'll wait till Monday to argue who and how to replace him. I'd like to see the politicians and media give the man 24hrs at least. Geez. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BunnysBastatrds 2,582 Posted February 14, 2016 My wife said it best "This has a Grisshm novel written all over it!" And I agree. Can't wait to see the autopsy. Fun days ahead. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IGotWorms 4,062 Posted February 14, 2016 I do think Obama should nominate a relative moderate. It'd be the right thing to do. However I guarantee you the Republicans will throw a temper tantrum regardless Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IGotWorms 4,062 Posted February 14, 2016 The man just died. Had 9 kids and 36 grandkids. Like him or not he served America. I'll wait till Monday to argue who and how to replace him. I'd like to see the politicians and media give the man 24hrs at least. Geez. Agree with this as well. Guy's corpse wasn't even cold before the right wing had to get out there trying to block the president from exercising his constitutional power to appoint 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IGotWorms 4,062 Posted February 14, 2016 My wife said it best "This has a Grisshm novel written all over it!" And I agree. Can't wait to see the autopsy. Fun days ahead. Can't wait to see the autopsy report? He was 79 years old. He didn't feel well and went to bed and died of a heart attack in his sleep. Oldest story in the book, happens all the time. Fockin' nutbag Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
naomi 360 Posted February 14, 2016 I think Obama will nominate himself. The perfect end to his narcissistic reign. He wants to be Secretary General of the UN. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Frozenbeernuts 2,330 Posted February 14, 2016 I do think Obama should nominate a relative moderate. It'd be the right thing to do. However I guarantee you the Republicans will throw a temper tantrum regardless I agree. I am a democrat but i also believe in balance. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KSB2424 3,172 Posted February 14, 2016 Agree with this as well. Guy's corpse wasn't even cold before the right wing had to get out there trying to block the president from exercising his constitutional power to appoint And immediately on the DNC website there is a fundraising page dedicated to replacing Scalia. Using his death to raise money for themselves. They both do it Worms. The fact is the process of naming a SC Justice takes time. I think they should all (media and politicians) at least give the man 24-48 hrs of respect. There is plenty of time for all this other stuff. Seems weird. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mungwater 601 Posted February 14, 2016 My wife said it best "This has a Grisshm novel written all over it!" And I agree. Can't wait to see the autopsy. Fun days ahead. He was an old man who drank like a fish and chain smoked. What do you expect to find? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hoytdwow 202 Posted February 14, 2016 Ridiculous for the repubtards to suggest obummer should not send in a nomination. the lack of objectivity is just farcical Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Thornton Melon 648 Posted February 14, 2016 Crap....I figured it'd be Ginsburg who dropped next 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hoytdwow 202 Posted February 14, 2016 Crap....I figured it'd be Ginsburg who dropped next She plans to retire after the election in hopes of a Hillary victory so she can be replaced by another liberal. If a rep wins not sure what she will do Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Reality 3,121 Posted February 14, 2016 the lack of objectivity is just farcical On both sides. The dude just croaked, the banter in this thread is pretty disgusting. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MDC 7,837 Posted February 14, 2016 On both sides. The dude just croaked, the banter in this thread is pretty disgusting. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Patriotsfatboy1 1,433 Posted February 14, 2016 On both sides. The dude just croaked, the banter in this thread is pretty disgusting. You would have thought we were talking about a guy who was murdered. He was 79, fat, and a smoker. He had one foot in the grave. Let's not make him out to be some sort of war hero. Scalia was a big proponent of the Constitution. In his honor, follow it. Have the President nominate, Senate vote and move on with life. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hoytdwow 202 Posted February 14, 2016 On both sides. . Oh? Which dems are suggesting the president shouldn't nominate someone just because it's an election year? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Reality 3,121 Posted February 14, 2016 Fock that piece of ######. This is amazing. Best news of the year. No, really. I'm over the focking moon. Wish he had croaked before he torpedoed action on Global Warming. HTH Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hoytdwow 202 Posted February 14, 2016 Fish McConnell will probably find some cannon fodder junior senators to filibuster a confirmation rather than obstructing the process himself by not scheduling a vote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Patriotsfatboy1 1,433 Posted February 14, 2016 Obama will nominate a moderate. The Republicans will delay, delay, delay and it will be used against them in the November elections. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
peenie 1,949 Posted February 14, 2016 calm down white people, no one is putting you in chains. he'll probably nominate an indian. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kutulu 1,701 Posted February 14, 2016 Obama will nominate a moderate. The Republicans will delay, delay, delay and it will be used against them in the November elections. that's what I'm thinking...it's seems like a lose lose for the reps. Either way (they win/lose the WH) it really seems like a water shed moment in us politics that will effect the country for years. Will be fascinating to see how the republican race shakes out now after Scalia's passing. Interesting times indeed. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Patriotsfatboy1 1,433 Posted February 14, 2016 that's what I'm thinking...it's seems like a lose lose for the reps. Either way (they win/lose the WH) it really seems like a water shed moment in us politics that will effect the country for years. Will be fascinating to see how the republican race shakes out now after Scalia's passing. Interesting times indeed. I think that it will have an impact on the Dems as well. I think that this is a bit of a boost for Clinton in that it can be a rallying cry against the obstructionist Republicans. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kutulu 1,701 Posted February 14, 2016 I think that it will have an impact on the Dems as well. I think that this is a bit of a boost for Clinton in that it can be a rallying cry against the obstructionist Republicans. I was wondering how it would impact the dem race. Seems to me they should try to stay out of the fray and let Obama fight the fight. Course they're a couple of dumb shittes and will probably fock the wet dream up. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Patriotsfatboy1 1,433 Posted February 14, 2016 I was wondering how it would impact the dem race. Seems to me they should try to stay out of the fray and let Obama fight the fight. Course they're a couple of dumb shittes and will probably fock the wet dream up. I think it might even help Bloomberg. Dems and Reps battle it out. Meanwhile, even less gets done. People get p!ssed at the established parties. Bloomberg comes in as white knight independent. Moderates eat it up. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kutulu 1,701 Posted February 14, 2016 I don't see it but who knows http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2016/02/14/what_a_bloomberg_run_might_look_like_129641.html Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mungwater 601 Posted February 14, 2016 I don't see it but who knows http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2016/02/14/what_a_bloomberg_run_might_look_like_129641.html I like how they mention Texas. He'd be better off not even trying, given his stance on guns. Just save his money for another state. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TimmySmith 2,783 Posted February 14, 2016 Obama's 1st nominee will not be a moderate. He/she will be an activist. The 2nd will be a moderate, and it will be a huge moment for both sides. The reality of the SC is you never quite know which way a judge will go, except for women, you get what you get with them. I doubt Obama will nominate one as he has 2 of them already. I will make a wager with anyone that the 2nd nominee will be black. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IGotWorms 4,062 Posted February 14, 2016 I was wondering how it would impact the dem race. Seems to me they should try to stay out of the fray and let Obama fight the fight. Course they're a couple of dumb shittes and will probably fock the wet dream up. I agree, they should stay out. Of course Obama can and should appoint a new justice. Beyond that stay out of it Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hoytdwow 202 Posted February 14, 2016 Obama's 1st nominee will not be a moderate. He/she will be an activist. Why would he do this? He has the tards by the balls and a perfect moderate already lined up in Srinivasan, who is widely respected and was unanimously confirmed for his federal seat Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IGotWorms 4,062 Posted February 14, 2016 Why would he do this? He has the tards by the balls and a perfect moderate already lined up in Srinivasan, who is widely respected and was unanimously confirmed for his federal seat Timmy is consistently stupid and wrong. HTH Sometimes you might nominate an ideologue first so your second guy seems not so bad in comparison. Kinda like when George W nominated the lady from down the hall as his first choice so Alito seemed like a good option since he was at least competent and qualified. But I don't think that's the situation here. Obama will go straight to a should-be consensus choice and then demand the republicans quit obstructing. Republicans will try to come up with some reason this person supposedly isn't fit but it will ring hollow. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hoytdwow 202 Posted February 14, 2016 Timmy is consistently stupid and wrong. HTH Sometimes you might nominate an ideologue first so your second guy seems not so bad in comparison. Kinda like when George W nominated the lady from down the hall as his first choice so Alito seemed like a good option since he was at least competent and qualified. But I don't think that's the situation here. Obama will go straight to a should-be consensus choice and then demand the republicans quit obstructing. Republicans will try to come up with some reason this person supposedly isn't fit but it will ring hollow. That's what I'm saying with Srinivasan. They unanimously confirmed him a few years ago and would look like idiots if they suddenly didn't back him. Obama already holds the high ground Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IGotWorms 4,062 Posted February 14, 2016 That's what I'm saying with Srinivasan. They unanimously confirmed him a few years ago and would look like idiots if they suddenly didn't back him. Obama already holds the high ground They'll say "well yeah but that wasn't for the SUPREME COURT". Everyone will roll their eyes Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Voltaire 5,458 Posted February 14, 2016 That's what I'm saying with Srinivasan. They unanimously confirmed him a few years ago and would look like idiots if they suddenly didn't back him. Obama already holds the high ground It's McConnell and he'll stall anyways. He doesn't mind looking hypocritical if it suits his purpose. Reid the same way, it's bipartisan. They've both happily exchanged each other's talking points in reverse depending on the situation. It's predictable and it's all political poker. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Voltaire 5,458 Posted February 14, 2016 I'm thinking how this works... The GOP is almost surely going to lose some seats in 2016. They're really playing defense with so disproportionately many of their own up for re-election than the Dems. If Obummer nominates a liberal, McConnell rejects the choice. But if Obummer nominates a moderate, that may work... stall... see how the election turns out in November then confirm or reject the nominee in the two month lame duck session before Hillary/Trump get sworn in depending on who wins. Because if Hillary wins, they're a lot better off with a moderate than seeing what she comes up with next term in what will surely be a more Dem friendly or majority Senate. Meanwhile, if Trump wins, fock that nominee - rejected. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
titans&bucs&bearsohmy! 2,745 Posted February 14, 2016 The republicans will overplay their hand and end up looking like obstructionist jagoffs; just like always. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Voltaire 5,458 Posted February 14, 2016 The republicans will overplay their hand and end up looking like obstructionist jagoffs; just like always. The stakes are obscenely high on this one. An Obummer SCOTUS nominee to replace Scalia is once in a career "must fall on their swords" moment and they absolutely won't mind doing so. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Chronic Husker 86 Posted February 14, 2016 What if Obama appoints Bill Clinton? I don't see it happening but the shizzstorm would be awesome. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites