Jump to content
 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

The death of Justice Scalia


Recommended Posts

Yes but my point was that the Republicans harp on the fact that Obama does not gather a consensus.  Cruz is the least likely person on the planet to even care about such a thing.  Unless America became a total fascist dictatorship under Cruz nothing would ever get done.  

Isn't winning the popular vote twice gathering a consensus?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mitch McConnell in 2005....

 

“Any President’s judicial nominees should receive careful consideration.  But after that debate, they deserve a simple up-or-down vote. . . . It’s time to move away from advise and obstruct and get back to advise and consent....."

 

http://www.occupydemocrats.com/2016/02/15/these-quotes-about-replacing-supreme-court-justices-are-haunting-mitch-mcconnell/

 

- of course Bush was Pres. then ;)

 

You should send this to Reid and Obama!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

What they really need is a law or rule in Congress that all bills are voted up or down by the full body within 60 days of presentation.  Perhaps permit a one time 60 day extension.  Every bill, nomination,etc. would be passed or not within 120 days. 

 

And no Riders!

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't winning the popular vote twice gathering a consensus?

yes but a consensus from the voters for the potus to make good on his specific promises to them which in the opinion of many obama has not done...

 

and many give obama a pass blaming a complete republican intransigence mindset...

 

maybe so but I always thought it took two to tango.

 

is obama then so irrevocably good and they're so completely rotten?

 

come on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What I find precious is Scalia's body isn't even cold yet, and republicans are digging up excuses for not doing the job they're getting paid for.  Many are trying to claim that since it's either an election year, or that Obama's a "lame duck", it means that a successor can't or shouldn't be put up for consideration, and that any pick Obama makes will get rejected out of hand anyway, as the right figures it'll be Obama's last chance to try and "stack the deck" with a liberal justice.

 

MY suggestion is for Obama to nominate the most conservative candidate he can think of, and watch the hurricane level winds caused by all the frantic back pedaling the right will HAVE to do to keep any level of credibility.  :D

 

Sepiatone

Link to post
Share on other sites

What I find precious is Scalia's body isn't even cold yet, and republicans are digging up excuses for not doing the job they're getting paid for. 

 

i thought liberals said he already had a cold body. Besides, he would approve of waiting till next year, it's in his will. Ted Cruz says he has the one and only copy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

MY suggestion is for Obama to nominate the most conservative candidate he can think of, and watch the hurricane level winds caused by all the frantic back pedaling the right will HAVE to do to keep any level of credibility. 

 

I absolutely love the idea of Obama doing a sneak - waiting for the Senate to go into recess and making a recess appointment.

 

Wow - would the fur fly. The Republicans would lose their freaking minds! Half of America probably would.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Mitch McConnell in 2005....

 

“Any President’s judicial nominees should receive careful consideration.  But after that debate, they deserve a simple up-or-down vote. . . . It’s time to move away from advise and obstruct and get back to advise and consent....."

 

http://www.occupydemocrats.com/2016/02/15/these-quotes-about-replacing-supreme-court-justices-are-haunting-mitch-mcconnell/

 

- of course Bush was Pres. then ;)

 

The news media has not picked up on this hypocritical statement.  Perhaps someone should send or tweet it to CNN.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I absolutely love the idea of Obama doing a sneak - waiting for the Senate to go into recess and making a recess appointment.

 

Wow - would the fur fly. The Republicans would lose their freaking minds! Half of America probably would.

the gop establishment might be dumb enough (I hope not) to recess so obama can make his appointment but they can't figure out why so many are rallying to trump?

 

simple. it's called being fed up with stupidity. :angry:

 

mcconnell and eddie munster better not.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have contacted both of my US senators, for what good it will do, and recommended that they pressure the Judiciary Committee and the Senate Majority Leader into having a confirmation vote within 90 days of each nominee that Obama submits.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have contacted both of my US senators, for what good it will do, and recommended that they pressure the Judiciary Committee and the Senate Majority Leader into having a confirmation vote within 90 days of each nominee that Obama submits.

the GOP regained control of the senate after the 2014 midterms...

 

elections have consequences.

:lol:

 

obama can pontificate all he wants but his appointee won't be confirmed, if ever, until his arrogant face is outta office. :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

the GOP regained control of the senate after the 2014 midterms...

 

elections have consequences.

:lol:

 

obama can pontificate all he wants but his appointee won't be confirmed, if ever, until his arrogant face is outta office. :D

the argument is obama has a right to have his scotus appointee duly considered now rather than later.

yeah? well I think the american people hadda right to be heard on the aca before nancy pelosi and her dem majority and reid and his majority shoved it down our throats without debate or any consensus...

 

but they did.

 

why? because they could.

 

now yesterday obama asked the gop for a single legit reason why his future appointee should be left hanging until sometime early next year after he's outta office.

 

well, where was this philosophical bent of his in 2009 when he sat back and let reid and pelosi shove the aca into hastily ill-considered law?

 

NOW he wants a philosophical discussion with the gop able to sit on his appontee until next year.

 

why?

 

because they're going to. :lol:

 

just like reid and pelosi did what they wanted in 2009.

 

fair IS fair. :D

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

"As speculation rages about who President Obama might nominate to replace Scalia, the names of federal appellate judges Merrick Garland, Jane Kelly, Patricia Millett, Jacqueline Nguyen, Srikanth Srinivasan and Paul Watford keep popping up.

For the disclosures required of federal judges, five of the six reported relatively modest and uncomplicated financial holdings for 2012 — the most recent year readily available — compared with many of their colleagues sitting on appellate courts, the nation’s second highest level of courts."

 

http://www.publicintegrity.org/2016/02/17/19325/what-do-possible-supreme-court-nominees-have-their-wallets?utm_content=buffere8a4a&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=publici-buffer

Link to post
Share on other sites

"As speculation rages about who President Obama might nominate to replace Scalia, the names of federal appellate judges Merrick Garland, Jane Kelly, Patricia Millett, Jacqueline Nguyen, Srikanth Srinivasan and Paul Watford keep popping up.

For the disclosures required of federal judges, five of the six reported relatively modest and uncomplicated financial holdings for 2012 — the most recent year readily available — compared with many of their colleagues sitting on appellate courts, the nation’s second highest level of courts."

 

http://www.publicintegrity.org/2016/02/17/19325/what-do-possible-supreme-court-nominees-have-their-wallets?utm_content=buffere8a4a&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=publici-buffer

doan matter.

 

it's all on hold until next year says the gop.

 

why?

 

because they can. :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

the argument is obama has a right to have his scotus appointee duly considered now rather than later.

yeah? well I think the american people hadda right to be heard on the aca before nancy pelosi and her dem majority and reid and his majority shoved it down our throats without debate or any consensus...

 

but they did.

 

why? because they could.

 

now yesterday obama asked the gop for a single legit reason why his future appointee should be left hanging until sometime early next year after he's outta office.

 

well, where was this philosophical bent of his in 2009 when he sat back and let reid and pelosi shove the aca into hastily ill-considered law?

 

NOW he wants a philosophical discussion with the gop able to sit on his appontee until next year.

 

why?

 

because they're going to. :lol:

 

just like reid and pelosi did what they wanted in 2009.

 

fair IS fair. :D

 

turns out eddie munster could be of some minor usefulness after all. :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

"As speculation rages about who President Obama might nominate to replace Scalia, the names of federal appellate judges Merrick Garland, Jane Kelly, Patricia Millett, Jacqueline Nguyen, Srikanth Srinivasan and Paul Watford keep popping up.

For the disclosures required of federal judges, five of the six reported relatively modest and uncomplicated financial holdings for 2012 — the most recent year readily available — compared with many of their colleagues sitting on appellate courts, the nation’s second highest level of courts."

 

http://www.publicintegrity.org/2016/02/17/19325/what-do-possible-supreme-court-nominees-have-their-wallets?utm_content=buffere8a4a&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=publici-buffer

 

They're probably as honest as we can expect.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So, I was watching CNN in the wee smalls this morning and there was a report on the rising conspiracy theory being suggested about Scalia's death, with many demanding an autopsy (which his family doesn't want).

yeah, I saw that and this black detective saying that scalia was nothing less than a supreme court justice.

 

but whadda you do? his family doan want an autopsy.

 

it does seem odd that a supreme court justice retires around nine saying he doan feel well and no one thinks he shoulda been checked out?

 

 

"it's just a bit of indigestion, antonin, you'll feel better after a good night's sleep."

:huh:

Link to post
Share on other sites

but whadda you do? his family doan want an autopsy.

 

it does seem odd that a supreme court justice retires around nine saying he doan feel well and no one thinks he shoulda been checked out?

 

 

If he was anything at home like he was at work, maybe one of his kids killed him?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
© 2021 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...