Obama nominates Garland...centrist moderate.

Obama nominates Garland...centrist moderate. (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

MrRodgers -> Obama nominates Garland...centrist moderate. (3/16/2016 12:15:15 PM)
Now the senate repubs are on the hot seat, so to speak. Should [it] grant a hearing or any vote at all ? If so, should the senate take it to the floor ? Recall that the senate judiciary committee voted Bork down 9-5 but still got a vote on the floor. The Reagan white house insisted on that floor vote...losing 52-48 with 6 repubs voting against. If [they] voted for Bork, he would have been on the SCOTUS. Could or should the Obama white house insist on a vote ? Could this admin. expect it ? HERE

subrob1967 -> RE: Obama nominates Garland...centrist moderate. (3/16/2016 1:02:44 PM)
No they're not, Garland's previous appointment took 2.5 years to clear the Senate, what makes you think the GOP will feel pressured now? If anything, President Obama has stepped on his dick yet again. I mean yet another old white guy? Isn't it bad enough that the Dems already have two old white people running for President? So much for diversity and inclusion.

Phydeaux -> RE: Obama nominates Garland...centrist moderate. (3/16/2016 1:53:59 PM)
Garlands position on 2nd Ammendment pretty much guarantees he's not getting on unless hillary nominates him. Liberal judge, very pro epa, anti gun. Obama didn't even try to pick a judge that would give republicans a hard time deciding - this is all about motivating dims to vote. If it results in Garland on the Supreme Court, its just gravy.

bounty44 -> RE: Obama nominates Garland...centrist moderate. (3/16/2016 2:50:23 PM)
one of the hosts of the five on fox (oh no comrades!) eric bolling just made a good point---that the senate should slow walk the process until they see who the next president's going to be. if its going to be Clinton, then give the guy the nod. if its going to be a republican, then not.

Phydeaux -> RE: Obama nominates Garland...centrist moderate. (3/16/2016 4:43:40 PM)
been saying the same thing for weeks. The only problem is, if it looks like hillary is going to win, they will withdraw his name from consideration.

cloudboy -> RE: Obama nominates Garland...centrist moderate. (3/16/2016 5:34:47 PM)
Would be fascinating if the Republicans lost the Presidency and Senate forfeiting their abilities to influence the nomination at all.

mnottertail -> RE: Obama nominates Garland...centrist moderate. (3/16/2016 5:39:49 PM)
The latest poll is 40% not voting for trump, they are going to lose the whole fuck-o-ree.

MasterJaguar01 -> RE: Obama nominates Garland...centrist moderate. (3/16/2016 5:48:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: bounty44 one of the hosts of the five on fox (oh no comrades!) eric bolling just made a good point---that the senate should slow walk the process until they see who the next president's going to be. if its going to be Clinton, then give the guy the nod. if its going to be a republican, then not. Why on earth is that a good point? Why is "slow walking" our Constitutional process a good idea? There is NOTHING in Article 2 Section 2 Appointments clause that says "see who the next president's going to be" See below: He[The President] shall have the Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two-thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Councils, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments. Bottom line: I agree with Mitch McConnell: The next justice could fundamentally alter the direction of the Supreme Court and have a profound impact on our country, so of course the American people should have a say in the court’s direction, The American people spoke: Obama: 65,918,507 Romney: 60,934,407

mnottertail -> RE: Obama nominates Garland...centrist moderate. (3/16/2016 6:22:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: subrob1967 No they're not, Garland's previous appointment took 2.5 years to clear the Senate, what makes you think the GOP will feel pressured now? If anything, President Obama has stepped on his dick yet again. I mean yet another old white guy? Isn't it bad enough that the Dems already have two old white people running for President? So much for diversity and inclusion. Hes half a jew as Obama is half black, some diversity.

BamaD -> RE: Obama nominates Garland...centrist moderate. (3/16/2016 6:25:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01 quote: ORIGINAL: bounty44 one of the hosts of the five on fox (oh no comrades!) eric bolling just made a good point---that the senate should slow walk the process until they see who the next president's going to be. if its going to be Clinton, then give the guy the nod. if its going to be a republican, then not. Why on earth is that a good point? Why is "slow walking" our Constitutional process a good idea? There is NOTHING in Article 2 Section 2 Appointments clause that says "see who the next president's going to be" See below: He[The President] shall have the Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two-thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Councils, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments. Bottom line: I agree with Mitch McConnell: The next justice could fundamentally alter the direction of the Supreme Court and have a profound impact on our country, so of course the American people should have a say in the court’s direction, The American people spoke: Obama: 65,918,507 Romney: 60,934,407 It also doesn't say that they have to put in someone they find objectionalble.

Phydeaux -> RE: Obama nominates Garland...centrist moderate. (3/16/2016 6:27:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01 quote: ORIGINAL: bounty44 one of the hosts of the five on fox (oh no comrades!) eric bolling just made a good point---that the senate should slow walk the process until they see who the next president's going to be. if its going to be Clinton, then give the guy the nod. if its going to be a republican, then not. Why on earth is that a good point? Why is "slow walking" our Constitutional process a good idea? There is NOTHING in Article 2 Section 2 Appointments clause that says "see who the next president's going to be" See below: He[The President] shall have the Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two-thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Councils, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments. Bottom line: I agree with Mitch McConnell: The next justice could fundamentally alter the direction of the Supreme Court and have a profound impact on our country, so of course the American people should have a say in the court’s direction, The American people spoke: Obama: 65,918,507 Romney: 60,934,407 You seem to forget the voters spoke a bit more recently: 54 republican senators. 246 house of representatives. 31 Republican governors. More than 9000 local and state politician pickups for the republicans. Pretty much their high water mark since 1929. So it seems you have a bit of a selective memory. Here's hoping the senate does what we sent them to congress to do. Tell obama to shove his nomine up his ass.

dcnovice -> RE: Obama nominates Garland...centrist moderate. (3/16/2016 6:44:23 PM)
quote: I mean yet another old white guy? "Yet another"? President Obama's first two SCOTUS appointees were women. (Still are, for that matter.) Justice Sotomayor is also the first Hispanic on the Supreme Court.

Lucylastic -> RE: Obama nominates Garland...centrist moderate. (3/16/2016 6:51:59 PM)
stop bringing facts into it DC< you know they cant handle that.[;)]

subrob1967 -> RE: Obama nominates Garland...centrist moderate. (3/16/2016 7:12:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: dcnovice quote: I mean yet another old white guy? "Yet another"? President Obama's first two SCOTUS appointees were women. (Still are, for that matter.) Justice Sotomayor is also the first Hispanic on the Supreme Court. Sanders is an old white guy, O'Malley was an old white guy, Clinton is an old white woman... Yes another old white guy. Lucy, you wouldn't know a fact if it came up and kicked you in the British Arse of yours.

Phydeaux -> RE: Obama nominates Garland...centrist moderate. (3/16/2016 7:20:14 PM)
Here's the inconvenient fact that I wish the republicans would pick up on: There are literally a thousand jurists the senate would vote to confirm. The republicans could publish a list and tell obama - since the business of the supreme court is so important to you - you pick any one of these x number of jursts - and we'll vote to confirm him. And then watch that whole kerfluffle blowback in the dims face. The sad fact is the republicans don't know how to play the game.

Lucylastic -> RE: Obama nominates Garland...centrist moderate. (3/16/2016 7:32:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: subrob1967 quote: ORIGINAL: dcnovice quote: I mean yet another old white guy? "Yet another"? President Obama's first two SCOTUS appointees were women. (Still are, for that matter.) Justice Sotomayor is also the first Hispanic on the Supreme Court. Sanders is an old white guy, O'Malley was an old white guy, Clinton is an old white woman... Yes another old white guy. Lucy, you wouldn't know a fact if it came up and kicked you in the British Arse of yours. awwww bless your heart:) You still cant handle the thought of non americans having a opinion here tough luck Now I can understand why you dont post much anymore...you have run out of facts.

MrRodgers -> RE: Obama nominates Garland...centrist moderate. (3/16/2016 8:32:35 PM)
Seems to matter a whole lot more now. I wonder why. First time the 6 member SCOTUS convened...only 3 showed up. It has had as few as 5 members and as many as 10. In 1869, congress said ok, ok will have 9. 64 SCOTUS judges...never even went to law school and get this, the last who didn't, Judge James F. Burnes...never grad. HS !! BTW if the 'American people have spoken' having elected a majority of 54 repub senators, that means they have told them specifically not to vote any judge in and a majority of the people 55% want the senate to give him a vote. It is times like these, I'd like to see the senate majority change, even if just to be 'speaking' again. The repubs simply don't want the exposure, don't want to try to justify voting any judge down. Seems they think they are taking the path of least political resistance.

Phydeaux -> RE: Obama nominates Garland...centrist moderate. (3/16/2016 9:13:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MrRodgers BTW if the 'American people have spoken' having elected a majority of 54 repub senators, that means they have told them specifically not to vote any judge in and a majority of the people 55% want the senate to give him a vote. And 80% of all statistics - like yours here, is made up on the spot. The numbers are somewhere around 43% wait, 51% nominate. But only 27% think a candidate will or should be confirmed. 38% view the court as too liberal. 23% too conservative. 51% believe obama has been less faithful to the constitution than most. Rasmussen Feb 17 poll.

MrRodgers -> RE: Obama nominates Garland...centrist moderate. (3/16/2016 9:45:11 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux quote: ORIGINAL: MrRodgers BTW if the 'American people have spoken' having elected a majority of 54 repub senators, that means they have told them specifically not to vote any judge in and a majority of the people 55% want the senate to give him a vote. And 80% of all statistics - like yours here, is made up on the spot. The numbers are somewhere around 43% wait, 51% nominate. But only 27% think a candidate will or should be confirmed. 38% view the court as too liberal. 23% too conservative. 51% believe obama has been less faithful to the constitution than most. Rasmussen Feb 17 poll. OK, what it did say is that fifty-five (55) percent of registered voters are sour on the GOP's move to block hearings to consider the nominee, regardless of the person Obama ultimately announces as his choice for the job. Which to me is saying 55% want a vote Only about one in three - 28 percent - approve of the GOP's strategy. But to be objective, 48-43 want a vote. HERE The NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll was conducted March 3-6. Funny how you know what 'I am trying to say' in other posts, when I have 'said' no such thing. And you post what I am saying about what you've said on other OP's, when I have said no such thing. Now you claim I just made this all up.

thompsonx -> RE: Obama nominates Garland...centrist moderate. (3/16/2016 10:22:44 PM)
ORIGINAL: subrob1967 No they're not, Garland's previous appointment took 2.5 years to clear the Senate, what makes you think the GOP will feel pressured now? If they do not appoint this guy and the demopubs win they withdraw this moderate guy and put in a an al frankin type. If trumph wins who would he appoint that the republicrats would approve of? I mean they do not approve of trumph so whoever he would pick would reflect his views. If they appoint this guy they get a strong law and order guy. How many senate seats will the demopubs pick up? This guy is a known quantity that the republicrats have already approved of for his current job which is just a half click down from the new job.

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.078125