Should Democrats block any vote on any other bill that comes through the Senate? Potentially this appointment is more important than winning the Senate this fall.
If Republicans block nominee bid...
- Thread starter theiacowtipper
- Start date
GOP Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is not really
a leader. He got his job by seniority. Perhaps the GOP
will screw up so badly in the Senate that they lose their
majority this November. Obama is not going to nominate
a conservative to the Supreme Court and the GOP will need
to deal with it..
a leader. He got his job by seniority. Perhaps the GOP
will screw up so badly in the Senate that they lose their
majority this November. Obama is not going to nominate
a conservative to the Supreme Court and the GOP will need
to deal with it..
Best possible legislative session this year would be for the Senate to not pass any new laws.
Obama should do what every President should do - nominate somebody with impeccable credentials and a history of sober-minded decision making, so that any attempt to block the nomination would make the people doing the blocking continue to look as foolish as they do today.
If the GOP base gets it drilled into their heads,by the GOP that Obama is trying to appoint another liberal SCOTUS, it "will" energize the GOP base come election time. And the current Senate can just keep putting it off until election time. I'm not saying it's right, because it isn't. But I bet that's what happens.
As foolish as people like McConnell and Cruz look right now, it's sad that they think this is what their base wants to hear them say.
Between McConnell and Grassley, no nomination will be discussed before the election. Grassley is as big a political hack as any Senator we've had in the past 30 years. He has an agenda and he will see it thru.......He has the power to quash anything he doesn't like....and BTW.....watch the revision of history begin now.
But were they the "best"qualified? Or were they they just qualified liberals?
he thinks they are "best qualified" and he is the President.
Gawd, you don't know how much I hope that the GOP refuses to confirm and then Bernie wins the general election! It would be enough to put some color back into McConnell's and Grassley's hair.
Well I sure hope you get your way so you don't blow a gasket. Gawd! Also, you sure put a lot of faith in politicians that they're telling the truth. Well, at least one side.
I hear Obama is going to use alien technology to clone his favorite justice and then say she has already been confirmed so he doesn't need a new vote.
Just need to bump off one more conservative justice. Then we'd have 4-3 or better decisions on all important issues.
Reverse Citizens United and related rulings.
Give the EPA the power it needs to protect our air, water and land.
Decide gun rights require militia membership.
What else?
Reverse Citizens United and related rulings.
Give the EPA the power it needs to protect our air, water and land.
Decide gun rights require militia membership.
What else?
Obama could nominate stalin and the republicans wouldn't be able or willing to do anything about it. Haven't impeached obama , haven't defunded the aca, haven't defunded planned parenthood. Supreme court rules the land anywho. Obama might as well put in kimm jung ill stomach or fidelity castro
Anyone want to guess who the author of the following statement is?
"The Constitution of the United States is at stake. Article II, Section 2 clearly provides that the President, and the President alone, nominates judges. The Senate is empowered to give advice and consent. But my Democratic colleagues want to change the rules. They want to reinterpret the Constitution to require a supermajority for confirmation. In effect, they would take away the power to nominate from the President and grant it to a minority of 41 Senators."
"[T]he Republican conference intends to restore the principle that, regardless of party, any President's judicial nominees, after full debate, deserve a simple up-or-down vote. I know that some of our colleagues wish that restoration of this principle were not required. But it is a measured step that my friends on the other side of the aisle have unfortunately made necessary. For the first time in 214 years, they have changed the Senate's 'advise and consent' responsibilities to 'advise and obstruct.'"
"The Constitution of the United States is at stake. Article II, Section 2 clearly provides that the President, and the President alone, nominates judges. The Senate is empowered to give advice and consent. But my Democratic colleagues want to change the rules. They want to reinterpret the Constitution to require a supermajority for confirmation. In effect, they would take away the power to nominate from the President and grant it to a minority of 41 Senators."
"[T]he Republican conference intends to restore the principle that, regardless of party, any President's judicial nominees, after full debate, deserve a simple up-or-down vote. I know that some of our colleagues wish that restoration of this principle were not required. But it is a measured step that my friends on the other side of the aisle have unfortunately made necessary. For the first time in 214 years, they have changed the Senate's 'advise and consent' responsibilities to 'advise and obstruct.'"
Tried and failed miserably. Are you saying the repubs should because the dems tried and failed?
Well Jan...what he is saying I guess, is that the GOP needs top belly up and vote down a candidate they don't want. However, they don't want to do this because of the election ramifications this act may have on the GOPO. It would just be further proof that this bunch of GOPers is truly, "the Party of No." As McConnell promised upon Obama's election...the GOP would do everything they could to obstruct his Presidency.
It is easier for the GOP not to have to take any action.
I've decided I'm with the Republicans on this. Every time there's a vacancy in anything, we should wait until the next election so the "people can have a voice in it."
I mean we shouldn't let these unelected folks act on appointments.
How did they get there?
How long should we allow since the last election before we say the president and our elected reps no longer represent the people? A month? Two months? A year?
I mean we shouldn't let these unelected folks act on appointments.
How did they get there?
How long should we allow since the last election before we say the president and our elected reps no longer represent the people? A month? Two months? A year?
well Obama was not elected and he was installed. so too will hill be installed. should we let hill nominate?
Apparently (as in I have not tested and take no responsibility) you can watch it free here:
http://putlocker.is/watch-the-pelican-brief-online-free-putlocker.html
No, we should let the installed install. How is that not obvious? If you believe the tripe you post, stop acting like there is a choice and just go with what they give you. why are you struggling to be heard when you think you have no voice?
I am one of the giants of hrot, I struggle for nothing around here.
Not true. The Ds let Reagan get Kennedy on the court in 1988. That was an election year.
Because the Dems blocked his original nominee and he ended up waiting 18 months to get Kennedy confirmed. So there is more to the story on this
Most-qualified female/diverse candidates.
Do you guys realize that there are NO Protestants on the current court?
Bork fired the Watergate Special Prosecutor after his two immediate supervisors resigned rather than commit the illegal act. That alone was enough to disqualify him.
So - yeah - there's more to the story.
Makes sense, Protestants came about because they didn't want to follow man made laws. Why would you ask them to interpret man made laws?
You used to be reasonable. Now you've gone herp a derp.
Sonia served on the U.S. Court of appeals and in federal court for 27 years, served both public and private law roles and ended the baseball strike.
Kagan was solicitor general ( you know the person to represent the U.S. before the supreme court) and dean of harvard law (last i heard that was a pretty good school) and served as a lawyer in the White House.
HOW IN THE HELL WERE THEY NOT QUALIFIED?
