Kopy 589 Posted March 16, 2016 there's already a black oneAnd now he even speaks.What more could people want. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
peenie 1,945 Posted March 16, 2016 there's already a black one so? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
peenie 1,945 Posted March 16, 2016 And now he even speaks. What more could people want. the question was why so many members assumed obama was going to nominate someone black. why don't you answer that! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KSB2424 3,172 Posted March 16, 2016 the question was why so many members assumed obama was going to nominate someone black. why don't you answer that! peenie, just because a couple people say something doesn't mean half of us all think the same way. Come on now. Don't be stereotyping all of us. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mike Honcho 5,412 Posted March 16, 2016 the question was why so many members assumed obama was going to nominate someone black. why don't you answer that! Cause... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cyclone24 1,935 Posted March 16, 2016 it's a VERY clever play by Obama and the Dems to put up a respectable, moderate judge and essential give the GOP a no-win situation. - nominate him and "lose" by giving in to the hellbent campaign to hold off - reject him and look like complete, obstructionist ass wholes Agree. It will be really stupid for the Republicans not to grab this guy now before Hillary gets in and nominates someone far far left. Out of curiosity if the Republicans Kick the Can into next year and a republican isn't President and it's Hillary can they still okay Merrick or can Hillary take back that nomination and nominate her own candidate? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Voltaire 5,453 Posted March 16, 2016 The Senate GOP has to realize that Trump will get crushed by Hillary and this is as good as it gets. Hillary's pick will be far worse. Of course, they made the boneheaded move of opposing the nominee before he was announced. Now if they back down on that, it looks like they cave again to Obummer, something the Trump/Cruz voters accuse them of doing all the time. A great pick by Obummer BTW. I'll have to learn more but the snippets of reaction from pundits in the know indicate this is a well respected older moderate which is exactly what I was hoping for. As as Chief Justice of the DC circuit, he's the most influential judge in America who isn't on SCOTUS which also makes him the most qualified. See... Dem president and GOP Senate can force each other to promote centrists even though there isn't more than a couple of centrists in either party. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
fandandy 3,313 Posted March 17, 2016 the question was why so many members assumed obama was going to nominate someone black. why don't you answer that! http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_OBAMA_SUPREME_COURT_BLACK_WOMEN?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2016-03-16-17-20-00 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Voltaire 5,453 Posted March 17, 2016 This is pretty exciting. I'm really having a good week. Hopefully the Senate GOP will realize Trump won't win, Hillary will appoint an uber-liberal with them probably in the minority, this is as good as it gets for five years. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KSB2424 3,172 Posted March 17, 2016 Mitch McConnell needs go. Obama pretty much handed the GOP an olive branch and they are still holding firm. But I guess they think this is what their constituents want. Just look at the election cycle. Moderates, working together, all that is considered a negative to the people that vote these people in. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sho Nuff 720 Posted March 17, 2016 Mitch McConnell needs go. Obama pretty much handed the GOP an olive branch and they are still holding firm. But I guess they think this is what their constituents want. Just look at the election cycle. Moderates, working together, all that is considered a negative to the people that vote these people in. Proving again the whole anti establishment crap with Trump is BS.If constituents are happy with more of the same politics and obstruction...they live what the establishment does. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MDC 7,825 Posted March 17, 2016 I was hoping it'd be Srinivasan but Garland seems like a good pick too. He's fairly old but I guess it's good that Obama is bucking the trend of putting on relatively young justices so they'll be on there for decades and decades Obummer probably did that so he'll die during Hillary's first term and she will nominate a left fringer. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IGotWorms 4,062 Posted March 17, 2016 Obummer probably did that so he'll die during Hillary's first term and she will nominate a left fringer. Hillary will have him killed either way because that's what she does. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
posty 2,807 Posted March 17, 2016 I know that the Republicans are standing firm and they keep saying that they will wait until a new president is in office, but I think I would seriously vet this nominee because I sure as hell wouldn't want Hillary picking someone for the court... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sho Nuff 720 Posted March 17, 2016 Also...if I hear one more Republican cry about the change in balance in the court...all was fine when it was tilted in their favor, but now they whine about it even with a moderate being nominated. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mike Honcho 5,412 Posted March 17, 2016 Also...if I hear one more Republican cry about the change in balance in the court...all was fine when it was tilted in their favor, but now they whine about it even with a moderate being nominated. The worst part of that was the court, lifetime appointments, in concept was supposed to be above the day to day politics. Sadly for the last 30 years it's been used as a political hammer by the GOP to strike down by judicial activism anything they don't like, or legitimize absurd restrictions on freedoms...and worse create rights that have never existed before. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Vikings4ever 568 Posted March 17, 2016 What happened to the thread where half of you suggested he was going to nominate a black person? Idiots! http://www.politico.com/story/2016/03/black-lawmakers-merrick-garland-pick-220924 Some African-American lawmakers urged their Congressional Black Caucus colleagues to skip a meeting with Valerie Jarrett because of discontent with President Barack Obama's Supreme Court nominee. The members are irked by Obama's selection of a moderate judge instead of a progressive who could rally the base, according to three lawmakers and senior aides familiar with the meeting. They also don't think that their input was adequately sought by the administration before Merrick Garland was nominated. A source said members are asking themselves, "What is the point" of attending the meeting, now that Garland has been nominated. The meeting took place on Thursday morning. And some of the lawmakers questioned why Garland, who is white, was selected over a minority in an effort to make the court more diverse. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites