Key GOP Senators Emerge From Meeting: No Hearing For Obama SCOTUS Nom

Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
Uncle Ben said:
You got that right, fuck 'em. Even Biden agrees it should be the next president.

Biden: President Should 'Not Name A Nominee Until After The November Election'
Click to expand...
You wingnuts just repeat everything without question. In '92, when this quote from Biden was lifted, and a total shithead Republican was sitting as a lame duck, Biden did not advocate what today's wingnut congress intends.

You have a tin ear and a small mind. You are proof that technical ability is not a measurement for intelligence.

Joe Biden Didn’t Say That The Senate Should Block Supreme Court Nominees During An Election Year
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2016/02/22/3752298/no-joe-biden-didnt-say-that-the-senate-should-block-supreme-court-nominees-during-an-election-year/

Biden’s full speech undermines their claim. Rather than urging his colleagues to deny Bush’s potential nominee a hearing, Biden was bemoaning the politicization of the confirmation process — hence his suggestion of not holding a hearing in the heat of a presidential election — and what he saw as Bush’s refusal to properly consult with the Senate in selecting a nominee. In fact, just 10 minutes after calling for temporary inaction on Bush’s candidate, Biden actually promised to consider a moderate Supreme Court nominee.
 
Last edited:
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
bearkat42 said:
Key Republican senators on the Judiciary Committee emerged from a closed door meeting in Majority Leader Mitch McConnell's office Tuesday united in their determination not to consider any nominee to replace Antonin Scalia until the next president takes office.

Tuesday was the first full day the Senate was back in session since Scalia's death Feb. 13.

"We believe the American people need to decide who is going to make this appointment rather than a lame duck president," said Majority Whip John Cornyn.

When asked if they would start the process after the new president took office or if they would consider doing it in the lame duck session, Cornyn replied "No, after the next president is selected. That way the American people have a voice in the process."

Sen. Lindsey Graham said that "there's no use starting a process that's not going to go anywhere and we are going to let the next president decide," when asked why there would be no hearings.

When TPM asked if he had political concerns about the decision not to move forward with a nominee, Graham responded."I have zero concerns politically."

"I think this is what they would do," Graham said referring to Senate Democrats. "For them to say they wouldn't do this is a lie."



Sen. Jeff Flake (R-AZ) demurred saying that Republicans were "still talking."


The meeting in McConnell's office came not long after he made a speech on the Senate floorvowing to block any Obama nominee.

"Presidents have a right to nominate just as the Senate has its constitutional right to provide or withhold consent. In this case, the Senate will withhold it," McConnell said. "The Senate will appropriately revisit the matter after the American people finish making in November the decision they've already started making today."
Click to expand...
Another nail in the obstructionist GOP senate's coffin. 24 Republican senators are up for this election cycle compared to 6 Democratic ones.

I don't think this is going to energize the electorate but the make-up of the Supreme court is a point of consideration for voters, especially younger voters. Thanks, GOP for helping Democrats turn out the vote.
 
CrocodileStunter

CrocodileStunter

Well-Known Member
Why can't we get to the real issue which is why wasn't scalias body autopsied? Another Obama trick that backfired and now he won't be able to stack the court.
 
londonfog

londonfog

Well-Known Member
This shit will certainly backfire on the GOP. Be it Hillary or Bernie, we will make the SCOTUS lean left. Can't wait until the election. This will make me work harder to assure a Dem is elected. Hell I might even vote twice again ;-)
 
CrocodileStunter

CrocodileStunter

Well-Known Member
UncleBuck said:
do you have sex with farm animals? or, more accurately, how often do you have sex with farm animals?
Click to expand...
nope. never. this is why America isn't gonna let liberals win the election. you're all fucked in the head and completely morally bankrupt. hence why Obama neede Scalia to die because he was the vote that kept our country free.
 
bearkat42

bearkat42

Well-Known Member
CrocodileStunter said:
nope. never. this is why America isn't gonna let liberals win the election. you're all fucked in the head and completely morally bankrupt. hence why Obama need Scalia to die because he was the vote that kept our country free.
Click to expand...
Glenn Beck personally performed the autopsy and came to the conclusion that Jesus killed Scalia.
 
T

ThickStemz

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
You wingnuts just repeat everything without question. In '92, when this quote from Biden was lifted, and a total shithead Republican was sitting as a lame duck, Biden did not advocate what today's wingnut congress intends.

You have a tin ear and a small mind. You are proof that technical ability is not a measurement for intelligence.

Joe Biden Didn’t Say That The Senate Should Block Supreme Court Nominees During An Election Year
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2016/02/22/3752298/no-joe-biden-didnt-say-that-the-senate-should-block-supreme-court-nominees-during-an-election-year/

Biden’s full speech undermines their claim. Rather than urging his colleagues to deny Bush’s potential nominee a hearing, Biden was bemoaning the politicization of the confirmation process — hence his suggestion of not holding a hearing in the heat of a presidential election — and what he saw as Bush’s refusal to properly consult with the Senate in selecting a nominee. In fact, just 10 minutes after calling for temporary inaction on Bush’s candidate, Biden actually promised to consider a moderate Supreme Court nominee.
Click to expand...
That is a distinction without a difference. Do you think for one second Obama would appoint a middle of the road kind of person here?

Hell no, and he has shown absolutely ZERO good faith in previous efforts to work with Congress, even his first two years when it was all Democrats he acted like he was the king simply notifying them of his wish to parlement, that's why he didn't get single payer
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
ThickStemz said:
That is a distinction without a difference. Do you think for one second Obama would appoint a middle of the road kind of person here?

Hell no, and he has shown absolutely ZERO good faith in previous efforts to work with Congress, even his first two years when it was all Democrats he acted like he was the king simply notifying them of his wish to parlement, that's why he didn't get single payer
Click to expand...
Thickie, you are blinded by your beliefs. Do you actually think that the GOP congress is anywhere near the middle? Obama IS a centrist, which is why he is such a disappointment to the left. Of course he will appoint a centrist. Who will also be too far away from the extremely right GOP congress for them to accept. I'm not sure that anybody Obama selects will be acceptable, even if he gave Sandra Day-O'Conor the nod to fill the post temporarily.
 
CrocodileStunter

CrocodileStunter

Well-Known Member
If you can't see the strategy behind having Scalia killed you are naive to the ways of the elites. Ya'll really justify the laisse faire actions of the coroner when it comes to a SC Justice? C'mon man
 
T

ThickStemz

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
Thickie, you are blinded by your beliefs. Do you actually think that the GOP congress is anywhere near the middle? Obama IS a centrist, which is why he is such a disappointment to the left. Of course he will appoint a centrist. Who will also be too far away from the extremely right GOP congress for them to accept. I'm not sure that anybody Obama selects will be acceptable, even if he gave Sandra Day-O'Conor the nod to fill the post temporarily.
Click to expand...
I think Obama has a duty to appoint someone.

I think congress has a duty to approve or disapprove.

I think the American people deserve to go to the polls to see if we get a liberal leaning court or a right leaning court.

Obama replaced 2 liberal justices with 2 more, one woefully unqualified.

W. Got 2, Clinton got 2, Bush got 1, Reagan got 2.

I see no need for Obama to have 3.

This is the most conservative member of the court. The most influential justice in ages who we are replacing. Hell no to his seat going to a lefty.

Obama isn't a centrist. He's the most left president we've ever had. He governs more from the center becuase he has been forced to. His initial agenda was too liberal for even a democratic congress and he got enough of them replaced by republicans.

The next president gets this pick and likely Ginsburg as well.

It's close enough to where America should get the choice, not a lame duck president.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top