Antonin Scalia Dies

[mobb_deep 920]

Why do republicans hate the constitution so much?

[IGotWorms 4,062]

Filibuster a nominee? Control the nomination process with political posturing? Use partisan politics to nominate or not nominate a prospective nominee who was qualified? Never, right? They never left it in committee for any period of time? Those Fawking leftist angels never crossed any lines like this, right?

 

Ya got nothing, but I already knew that.

[peenie 1,948]

What would be racist about Obama nominating a black man? There are probably many qualified black judges.

 

there is nothing racist about obama nominating a black person. i didn't call anyone racist for that. i found it racist or rather presumptuous for the the people of this bored to assume that just because obama is black that he would nominate a black person. he certainly hasn't done it thus far.

[IGotWorms 4,062]

POW!!!!

 

I believe there was a question pending to you. Want to give it a crack?

[Voltaire 5,456]

Hmmm... the GOP will filibuster whoever gets nominated anyways so maybe Obummer goes for a black or Hispanic so as to inflict maximum damage by allowing Hiklary to pull out the "R" word. That + Trump in their living room giving ther favorite candidate wedgies could be entertaining to see play out.

[BunnysBastatrds 2,582]

 

Ya got nothing, but I already knew that.

I appreciate your ignorance also.

[BunnysBastatrds 2,582]

Hmmm... the GOP will filibuster whoever gets nominated anyways so maybe Obummer goes for a black or Hispanic so as to inflict maximum damage by allowing Hiklary to pull out the "R" word. That + Trump in their living room giving ther favorite candidate wedgies could be entertaining to see play out.

Growing political strife in an election cycle...shocking!

[Chronic Husker 86]

After reading this whole thread, all of this is going to fall into the dems laps.

 

If the GOP tries to go the obstruction route, they're going to look more like sour grapes asses the closer to November we get.

 

Dunno if any of you saw but a week or two ago Scott Walker spoke to the Tea Party and told them flat out they are the problem. This nomination will be a prime example.

 

That being said, Obama will need to make sure he nominates someone with an airtight squeaky clean background (like with Kagan) so there's no way for the candidate to get voted down.

 

Nominating someone with a Coke can pube story in their past would flip the script and be an utter disaster, nowadays.

 

I'm hoping and betting he nominates a lib as opposed to a moderate just to tempt the GOP into douchebaggery. A lot of GOP senate seats up for grabs this fall...

[hoytdwow 202]

did you tell him what you were going to do before you did it?

[titans&bucs&bearsohmy! 2,745]

If I'm Obama, I do this.

 

I pick three names. Moderates. Right if what he would like, and left of what McConnell would like.

 

Then I invite McConnell into the Oval Office and say, lets you and me agree right here right now on one of these names and end this.

 

If McConnell refuses, I find my dream candidate, a flaming liberal with impeccable qualifications. And I make the senate republicans look as bad as possible.

[cbfalcon 827]

So while browsing this thread, did I see people arguing that the Repubes should refuse to approve any nominee with the reasoning being that the Dems did the same thing in the past? Even if that's true, is that where we are? And if so, when does someone just do what's right and stop the cycle?

 

Obama has a year left.....25% of his term. There is a lot to be done in the next year.

 

I guess I need it explained. If there is a precise moment a president becomes a lame duck, the one that makes sense is "The moment his successor has been elected". It's logical. But to claim Obama isn't a lame duck at 11:59pm on December 31st, but something changes drastically 60 seconds later making him one seems a bit arbitrary to me. I feel like I could make just as solid an arbitrary argument that he becomes a lame duck exactly 24 months before his term ends, or that he becomes a lame duck 1 day after he himself is elected.

[KSB2424 3,172]

So while browsing this thread, did I see people arguing that the Repubes should refuse to approve any nominee with the reasoning being that the Dems did the same thing in the past? Even if that's true, is that where we are? And if so, when does someone just do what's right and stop the cycle?

 

Obama has a year left.....25% of his term. There is a lot to be done in the next year.

 

I guess I need it explained. If there is a precise moment a president becomes a lame duck, the one that makes sense is "The moment his successor has been elected". It's logical. But to claim Obama isn't a lame duck at 11:59pm on December 31st, but something changes drastically 60 seconds later making him one seems a bit arbitrary to me. I feel like I could make just as solid an arbitrary argument that he becomes a lame duck exactly 24 months before his term ends, or that he becomes a lame duck 1 day after he himself is elected.

 

1. Technically, by the book, the term "Lame Duck" means after his successor has been elected. So November of this year.

 

2. It's more loosely used as the last year of a Presidency. Either the 4th year of a President who has said he is not running for re-election or the 8th year.

 

3. This scenario where a SCJ died in the known last year of a Presidency has happened once in our history. 1968 and Johnson nominated somebody.

 

4. And to your bolded question, yes this is where we are at. But it's where we've also been. If the shoe was on the other foot and a Bush was President, a Democrat controlled Senate would work like hell to delay.

 

5. In my opinion, Obama has every right to nominate somebody. To say he shouldn't is sorta dumb.

[Thornton Melon 648]

...a flaming liberal with impeccable qualifications...

Now there's a contradiction in terms if I ever saw one...

[gocolts 300]

I know that. But a 4-4 vote means it reverts to the lower courts ruling and by that would basically take decisions away from the highest court in the land.

That is far from "Gridlock".

 

[gocolts 300]

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPZxW0Dwtn0

 

[jerryskids 7,054]

If I'm Obama, I do this.

 

I pick three names. Moderates. Right if what he would like, and left of what McConnell would like.

 

Then I invite McConnell into the Oval Office and say, lets you and me agree right here right now on one of these names and end this.

 

If McConnell refuses, I find my dream candidate, a flaming liberal with impeccable qualifications. And I make the senate republicans look as bad as possible.

 

I like this. And I hate that my Repubtard party is sinking too the "mommy, he did it too$#@!" bullshiot excuse. I want to be the adults in the room. Let's agree on this moderate Indian judge or someone similar and move on.

[Hardcore troubadour 15,908]

Obama filibustered Alitos appointment to the SC.

[mobb_deep 920]

Why does PoColts hate the constitution? Shouldn't I get an extra vote for paying his bills?

[BunnysBastatrds 2,582]

 

I like this. And I hate that my Repubtard party is sinking too the "mommy, he did it too$#@!" bullshiot excuse. I want to be the adults in the room. Let's agree on this moderate Indian judge or someone similar and move on.

The adults in the room? That's Fawking funny. There hasn't been an adult in the room since the repubs won the house in 94. Working with congress stopped right there. Add in W's election over Gore and here we are.

 

Your mommy analogy is cute. Tell that to Reed and Pelosi when they were out of power. They invented mommy. And should bed with her.

[jerryskids 7,054]

The adults in the room? That's Fawking funny. There hasn't been an adult in the room since the repubs won the house in 94. Working with congress stopped right there. Add in W's election over Gore and here we are.

 

Your mommy analogy is cute. Tell that to Reed and Pelosi when they were out of power. They invented mommy. And should bed with her.

 

I don't care about Reid and Pelosi, they are yesterday's news. And my mommy analogy is spot on for the current situation; sorry if you don't like it. Instead of "WAAAAAAA" let's set a leadership vision for the country. Just a thought.

[Hardcore troubadour 15,908]

The adults in the room? That's Fawking funny. There hasn't been an adult in the room since the repubs won the house in 94. Working with congress stopped right there. Add in W's election over Gore and here we are.

 

Your mommy analogy is cute. Tell that to Reed and Pelosi when they were out of power. They invented mommy. And should bed with her.

I thought Gingrich and Clinton got a lot done despite their differences and after the republicans and Gingrich shut down the government. And GW Bush got plenty of cooperation after 9/11. Unfortunately

[IGotWorms 4,062]

 

I like this. And I hate that my Repubtard party is sinking too the "mommy, he did it too$#@!" bullshiot excuse. I want to be the adults in the room. Let's agree on this moderate Indian judge or someone similar and move on.

When did the Dems do it?

 

I mean I certainly understand the tit for tat aspects of politics but fact is the dems haven't done this. Not that I've seen. Nearest precedent is Kennedy and the dems allowed him to come up for a vote and confirmed him

[jerryskids 7,054]

When did the Dems do it?

 

I mean I certainly understand the tit for tat aspects of politics but fact is the dems haven't done this. Not that I've seen. Nearest precedent is Kennedy and the dems allowed him to come up for a vote and confirmed him

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Bork_Supreme_Court_nomination

[BunnysBastatrds 2,582]

 

I don't care about Reid and Pelosi, they are yesterday's news. And my mommy analogy is spot on for the current situation; sorry if you don't like it. Instead of "WAAAAAAA" let's set a leadership vision for the country. Just a thought.

We did set a leadership policy. That contract with America is what won back the house.First time in how many years? And we spent the next twenty years apologizing for wining?

 

Fawk them. They cried from day one and we tried to be friends. And we lost ground. They are cut throat. We were poosays. Time to be cut throat and let them be the bottom.

 

It saddens me what the Republican Party has become. A bunch of poosays trying their best to play nice while the dems run circles around them.

 

The dems go for the throat. We should, and are instead going for the tampon of menaposal hippy leftover kunts from the 60's who have stated their hate for conservatives.

 

Blahhhh

[IGotWorms 4,062]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Bork_Supreme_Court_nomination

Bork came up for a vote and was not confirmed. Reagan then nominated Kennedy who was confirmed.

 

Not at all the same as refusing to even bring an appointment up for a vote and suggesting the president shouldn't even be able to nominate anyone, now is it?

 

[jerryskids 7,054]

We did set a leadership policy. That contract with America is what won back the house.First time in how many years? And we spent the next twenty years apologizing for wining?

 

Fawk them. They cried from day one and we tried to be friends. And we lost ground. They are cut throat. We were poosays. Time to be cut throat and let them be the bottom.

 

It saddens me what the Republican Party has become. A bunch of poosays trying their best to play nice while the dems run circles around them.

 

The dems go for the throat. We should, and are instead going for the tampon of menaposal hippy leftover kunts from the 60's who have stated their hate for conservatives.

 

Blahhhh

So... A Sco

 

Bork came up for a vote and was not confirmed. Reagan then nominated Kennedy who was confirmed.

 

Not at all the same as refusing to even bring an appointment up for a vote and suggesting the president shouldn't even be able to nominate anyone, now is it?

 

 

Yeah, my point is that Bork was shot down. Your statement that Kennedy was "allowed" to come up for a vote and be confirmed is noble I suppose, in your liberal world.

[IGotWorms 4,062]

So... A Sco

 

 

Yeah, my point is that Bork was shot down. Your statement that Kennedy was "allowed" to come up for a vote and be confirmed is noble I suppose, in your liberal world.

Wow, okay, I see I'm dealing with hack Jerry tonight.

 

Let me know when you'd like to have an adult conversation

[kutulu 1,701]

A little wiggle room....

 

 

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Charles Grassley told Iowa radio reporters Tuesday he supports Majority Leader Mitch McConnell's view that Obama's successor should nominate someone but won't make any decision until there's a nominee.

[TimmySmith 2,783]

I wish the crybaby Dems in this thread would wait for a nominee before peeing their pants in "outrage".

[Mike Honcho 5,412]

I hope they can too, but they have not stopped him anything else, so I am sure this will be no different.

 

I went to my dad's this afternoon. As soon as I arrived, he asked if I had heard the big news of the day. I said nope. He was watching the Walking Dead and switched it to cable news.

 

I was completely DEVASTATED. To think this motherfocker is going to get another SCOTUS appointment CRUSHED me.

 

In fact, I think I am extremely close giving up completely on this country.

 

We are so FOCKED it is, yes, I am going to say it, BEYOND BELIEF.

 

I wish the crybaby Dems in this thread would wait for a nominee before peeing their pants in "outrage".

[mighty_thor 115]

Obama filibustered Alitos appointment to the SC.

They tried to filibuster Alito bu failed as some dems would not go along. If I remember correctly there was some racist organization that Alioto belonged to and he had used that on an application to a Reagan administration position. He disavowed the group in his nomination hearings saying that he did not agree with their views.

 

I have no problem with the republicans blocking certain nominees but to take the stance that no nominee from OBama should become a SCJ is just plain wrong. This action could get me off my ass on election night to vote for Hillary which I have no intention on doing.

[drobeski 3,061]

What's with the crying Dems ? The milk hasn't spilled yet ?

[Patriotsfatboy1 1,433]

What's with the crying Dems ? The milk hasn't spilled yet ?

So, if someone threatens to punch you in the mouth, you just wait until they punch you?

[drobeski 3,061]

So, if someone threatens to punch you in the mouth, you just wait until they punch you?

you cry and hope they don't ?

 

Haven't the Dems threatened the same in the past ?

[Patriotsfatboy1 1,433]

you cry and hope they don't ?

 

Haven't the Dems threatened the same in the past ?

 

You don't cry either way. You use it against them. Show them as obstructionist reasons as to why things don't get done.

 

I haven't seen the Dems do it in the past, but if they did, I would be against it as well. The Reps should not, from one side of their mouth wax poetically about the strict Constitutional views of Scalia, and then ignore the Constitution out of the other side of your mouth.

[IGotWorms 4,062]

Haven't the Dems threatened the same in the past ?

Have they? Link please?

 

I feel like I'm dealing with crazy people here

[Mike Honcho 5,412]

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPZxW0Dwtn0

 

 

Shocking? Hardly, since that's a false equivalency. After considering Alito's nomination she voted against, unlike Senator McConnell who has threatened to not bring to a vote any nominations.

[MDC 7,835]

The GOP will stonewall for a while before buckling under public pressure, pissing off their own constituents and the opposition party. Obummer has been playing the Republican Party like a fiddle for 7 years, no reason to think that won't continue right up to the elections.

[TimmySmith 2,783]

you cry and hope they don't ?

 

Haven't the Dems threatened the same in the past ?

A perceived threat to a Dem must be reality to them.

[Voltaire 5,456]

The GOP will stonewall for a while before buckling under public pressure, pissing off their own constituents and the opposition party. Obummer has been playing the Republican Party like a fiddle for 7 years, no reason to think that won't continue right up to the elections.

We'll see how it goes. I hope Rob Portman and a few others can find a way out of the box but overall the Senate GOP can get bent,