Scalia Dead

[CarlV]

KCBS just broadcast he was found dead in Texas.
Associate Justice Antonin Scalia was found dead of apparent natural causes Saturday on a luxury resort in West Texas, federal officials said.

Scalia, 79, was a guest at the Cibolo Creek Ranch, a resort in the Big Bend region south of Marfa.

According to a report, Scalia arrived at the ranch on Friday and attended a private party with about 40 people. When he did not appear for breakfast, a person associated with the ranch went to his room and found a body.

Chief U.S. District Judge Orlando Garcia, of the Western Judicial District of Texas, was notified about the death from the U.S. Marshals Service.

U.S. District Judge Fred Biery said he was among those notified about Scalia's death.

"I was told it was this morning," Biery said of Scalia's death. "It happened on a ranch out near Marfa. As far as the details, I think it's pretty vague right now as to how," he said. "My reaction is it's very unfortunate. It's unfortunate with any death, and politically in the presidential cycle we're in, my educated guess is nothing will happen before the next president is elected."
http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/us-world/article/Senior-Associate-Justice-Antonin-Scalia-found-6828930.php


Carl

[finnbow]

Wow. The GOP is gonna freak out over Obama's next appointment. The GOP might try to quash the story and prop him up on the bench, Weekend at Bernie's style.

[CarlV]

I guess RIP Scalia, but it sure is a great day for the United States Of America, he is no longer destroying the fabric of our great country..

Carl

[Tom Joad]

I guess RIP Scalia,

I'll say it with no problem,

Rot in Hell you Son of a Bitch.

[CarlV]

Luxury resort, private party, he never misses a Koch Summit......



Carl

[Tom Joad]

It says he was "found dead". That probably means the fucker died alone. That pleases me.

[finnbow]

I have no problem with him having been an advocate for a conservative POV (which I don't share, BTW) in that I like the idea of a court with different POV's on it. I wouldn't want a court with an absolute conservative or liberal majority, but prefer one with an internal tension (or completely devoid of a political ideology, if that were even possible).

It'll be interesting to see who becomes the spokesperson for conservatism on the SCOTUS. Thomas is probably closest to Scalia in ideology, but I think he's a deaf mute.:D

[Boreas]

Wow. The GOP is gonna freak out over Obama's next appointment. The GOP might try to quash the story and prop him up on the bench, Weekend at Bernie's style.

This is going to be pretty nasty. The Republicans won't confirm Scalia's replacement, no matter who it is. They'll let it drag out until after the general and, if a Republican wins, until after he's sworn in.

[icenine]

I doubt Obama can get a nominee through during an election year unless he nominates Glenn Beck. I am glad Ginsburg is still here for us.

[bobabode]

My guess is that the Repubs will try to hold off confirmation until Obama is out of office.

[Boreas]

I have no problem with him having been an advocate for a conservative POV (which I don't share, BTW) in that I like the idea of a court with different POV's on it. I wouldn't want a court with an absolute conservative or liberal majority, but prefer one with an internal tension (or completely devoid of a political ideology, if that were even possible).

Another Liberal on the bench offers the best chance of that.

It'll be interesting to see who becomes the spokesperson for conservatism on the SCOTUS. Thomas is probably closest to Scalia in ideology, but I think he's a deaf mute.:D

It'll be Sammy the Fish.

[Boreas]

My guess is that the Repubs will try to hold off confirmation until Obama is out of office.

Beat ya!

[68custom]

No way we will see a new justice till after we have a new president.
why do I feel like singing "Ding Dong The Witch is Dead"?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHJoj9IqeKg

[bobabode]

Beat ya!

Wanna gold star? :cool:

[finnbow]

This is going to be pretty nasty. The Republicans won't confirm Scalia's replacement, no matter who it is. They'll let it drag out until after the general and, if a Republican wins, until after he's sworn in.

Recess appointments are allowed for the SCOTUS, provided that it is truly a Senate recess (unlike the quasi-recess that Obama tried to take advantage of and got shot down for).

[bobabode]

"Nothing illustrated the dynamic so well as his close friendship with Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, with whom he was in frequent disagreement. The two served together on the D.C. Circuit and respected each other’s intellect. Scalia and his wife, and Ginsburg and her husband, Martin, celebrated most New Year’s Eves together."


"Ginsburg said no one made her laugh as much as Justice Scalia did. “I love him. But sometimes I’d like to strangle him,” she once said." WaPo

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/supreme-court-justice-antonin-scalia-dies-at-79/2016/02/13/effe8184-a62f-11e3-a5fa-55f0c77bf39c_story.html?hpid=hp_hp-banner-high_scalia-535pm%3Ahomepage%2Fstory

Can anyone confirm the whereabouts of the 'Notorious RBG' last night? :D

[Mr. Lin]

I have no problem with him having been an advocate for a conservative POV (which I don't share, BTW) in that I like the idea of a court with different POV's on it. I wouldn't want a court with an absolute conservative or liberal majority, but prefer one with an internal tension (or completely devoid of a political ideology, if that were even possible).

I don't celebrate someone's death, but we're certainly far better off without that dangerous, ignorant, pseudo-intellectual on the bench. Opposing points of view is one thing, but we shouldn't have supreme court justices who believe that the Devil no longer makes pigs run off cliffs simply because he's "wilier."

Can we talk about your drafting process—
[Leans in, stage-whispers.] I even believe in the Devil.

You do?
Of course! Yeah, he’s a real person. Hey, c’mon, that’s standard Catholic doctrine! Every Catholic believes that.

Every Catholic believes this? There’s a wide variety of Catholics out there … If you are faithful to Catholic dogma, that is certainly a large part of it.

Have you seen evidence of the Devil lately?
You know, it is curious. In the Gospels, the Devil is doing all sorts of things. He’s making pigs run off cliffs, he’s possessing people and whatnot. And that doesn’t happen very much anymore.

No.
It’s because he’s smart.

...

Well, you’re saying the Devil is persuading people to not believe in God. Couldn’t there be other reasons to not believe?
Well, there certainly can be other reasons. But it certainly favors the Devil’s desires. I mean, c’mon, that’s the explanation for why there’s not demonic possession all over the place. That always puzzled me. What happened to the Devil, you know? He used to be all over the place. He used to be all over the New Testament.

Right.
What happened to him?

He just got wilier.
He got wilier.

http://nymag.com/news/features/antonin-scalia-2013-10/

[Boreas]

Wanna gold star? :cool:

Sure!!

[JBS...]

This is going to be pretty nasty. The Republicans won't confirm Scalia's replacement, no matter who it is. They'll let it drag out until after the general and, if a Republican wins, until after he's sworn in.

+1

RIP Judge...

My "prayers and sympathies" are with his family.

[CarlV]

There will be no end to the process of replacement, it will be kept in a legal battle for years. Yes, there will be no price too small for the Koch Bros. to pay to get another stooge to do their bidding into the SCOTUS, they are left with Justice Oreo and Chief Justice Roberts on most days.


Carl

[finnbow]

"The American people‎ should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice. Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new President.”

- Mitch McConnell

What an @sshole. Unless I'm mistaken, the people spoke when they elected Obama. Twice.

[JBS...]

"The American people‎ should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice. Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new President.”

- Mitch McConnell

What an @sshole. Unless I'm mistaken, the people spoke when they elected Obama. Twice.

But he would be within his right to block, delay and or keep the senate out of recess. Would he not Finn?

[djv8ga]

Rest In Peace.

[CarlV]

Cruise was legally able to block paying for the budget he voted for. His kool aid drinkers think it is great he cost US taxpayers 27 billion for no good reason other than because he could too. Just because he could doesn't make it right IMO.


Carl

[djv8ga]

Ted Cruz For Supreme Court Justice. :cool: Trump will be happy to seat him.

[CarlV]

Ted Cruz For Supreme Court Justice. :cool: Trump will be happy to seat him.

I want some of what you're smokin'.



Carl

[CarlV]

"The American people‎ should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice. Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new President.”

- Mitch McConnell


Whatcha gonna say Mitchie when Bernie appoints SCOTUS Justice Obama? :p


Carl

[Boreas]

"The American people‎ should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice. Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new President.”

- Mitch McConnell

What an @sshole. Unless I'm mistaken, the people spoke when they elected Obama. Twice.

I agree! We should wait until President Clinton is sworn in so she can appoint Justice Obama to the SCOTUS.

Yup! Like I said, this is going to be really, really nasty. The fact that McConnell couldn't even wait until Scalia was cold before declaring war is ample proof of that.

I just hope this will show some of the sane Republicans what a bunch of degenerates are running their party.

[finnbow]

But he would be within his right to block, delay and or keep the senate out of recess. Would he not Finn?

It would be precedent-setting to not seat a SCOTUS justice for 11 months. If they do so and a Republican wins the Presidency, the Democrats should do whatever necessary to preclude confirmation of any nominee of the new President for the SCOTUS the remainder of his (full) term. Turnabout is fair play.

[Tom Joad]

"The American people‎ should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice. Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new President.”

- Mitch McConnell

What an @sshole. Unless I'm mistaken, the people spoke when they elected Obama. Twice.

I knew they would block a replacement and I knew they would make an election issue out of it. Where I was wrong was that I thought they would wait until tonight's debate to do that. Missed it by a couple of hours.:rolleyes:

[Oerets]

Hope he goes in front of a Liberal leaning Judge to argue his case.

Haven't you heard Obama's going to appoint himself to the bench! According to my BIL the TP'r or whatever he is calling it now.




Barney

[sheltiedave]

Guys, even though Scalia is at the far right of the spectrum, he
a) has a family, with a wife and nine kids
b) had the ball s and intellectual capacity to marshall a court over a twenty year period to accept his brand of jurisprudence and thinking. This guy had the smarts, the wit, and the personality to create a conservative court.

Although some of his reasoning was of an ilk I disagreed with, he was one of the deepest thinkers of the modern court, and I tip my hat to him, out of respect and appreciation for serving his country to the best of his abilities. Lets not descend and parallel how the politicians behave on both sides, put pay our respects....and pray a Democrat wins this election.

[noonereal]

Scalia Dead



Carl

Condolences but

not a bad thing at all.

[finnbow]

Guys, even though Scalia is at the far right of the spectrum, he
a) has a family, with a wife and nine kids
b) had the ball s and intellectual capacity to marshall a court over a twenty year period to accept his brand of jurisprudence and thinking. This guy had the smarts, the wit, and the personality to create a conservative court.

Although some of his reasoning was of an ilk I disagreed with, he was one of the deepest thinkers of the modern court, and I tip my hat to him, out of respect and appreciation for serving his country to the best of his abilities. Lets not descend and parallel how the politicians behave on both sides, put pay our respects....and pray a Democrat wins this election.

Well stated, Dave. As bad as some of his opinions were IMO, gloating over his death is worse.

[Boreas]

Guys, even though Scalia is at the far right of the spectrum, he
a) has a family, with a wife and nine kids
b) had the ball s and intellectual capacity to marshall a court over a twenty year period to accept his brand of jurisprudence and thinking. This guy had the smarts, the wit, and the personality to create a conservative court.

Although some of his reasoning was of an ilk I disagreed with, he was one of the deepest thinkers of the modern court, and I tip my hat to him, out of respect and appreciation for serving his country to the best of his abilities. Lets not descend and parallel how the politicians behave on both sides, put pay our respects....and pray a Democrat wins this election.

For the most part the posts in this thread have been free of invective where Justice Scalia is concerned. On the other hand, there have been some pretty sharp and cynical posts concerning what's to come next but Mitch McConnell has proven them to be entirely justified.

[d-ray657]

"The American people‎ should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice. Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new President.”

- Mitch McConnell

What an @sshole. Unless I'm mistaken, the people spoke when they elected Obama. Twice.

I find it ironic and disgusting that the Republicans, who are always whining that Obama violates the Constitution with his executive orders (and legislation for that matter), are now willing to disregard the Constitution for pure political expediency. The Constitution does not vest the power of appointing Supreme Court Justices to the electorate. The Constitution gives that authority to the PRESIDENT, with the advice and consent of the Senate. We have a twice elected President who has nearly a year to serve in his second term. Under the Constitution, the Senate has the obligation to take up whatever individual he selects to fill the vacancy. It is a violation of the Senate's constitutional duty to preemptively usurp the functions of the two other branches of government by obstructing the process. So in response to JBS's question, no McConnell would not be within his rights to refuse to consider a nomination to the Supreme Court.

Regards,

D-Ray

[bobabode]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CbIwcbvWIAEdDOn.png

Class act here.

[d-ray657]

Ted Cruz For Supreme Court Justice. :cool: Trump will be happy to seat him.

I think that most of the senators in his own party would reject him.

Regards,

D-Ray

[Boreas]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CbIwcbvWIAEdDOn.png

"The Senate has a constitutional responsibility here that it cannot abdicate for partisan political reasons."

But, of course, they will abdicate their responsibility and for precisely those reasons.

[bobabode]

"The Senate has a constitutional responsibility here that it cannot abdicate for partisan political reasons."

But, of course, they will abdicate their responsibility and for precisely those reasons.

Yep, they've been sitting on Obama's judicial appointments like Kim for the DC Court of Appeals and elsewhere.

IMO, it's Republican leaders like 'Yertle' McConnell who are lawless and should be impeached. :mad:

[donquixote99]

McConnell should have had the decency to let the sun set on the guy at least.

So how would this no-recess idea work? Wouldn't a bunch of Republicans have to stay in town over Christmas, to keep the Democrats from adjourning the session?

[Pio1980]

Scalia was someone who basically believed the clock should have stopped sometime between the ratification of the Constitution and the adoption of the Bill of Rights. The future belongs to those that will live in it and not serving as a museum of the past.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

[d-ray657]

McConnell should have had the decency to let the sun set on the guy at least.

So how would this no-recess idea work? Wouldn't a bunch of Republicans have to stay in town over Christmas, to keep the Democrats from adjourning the session?

Ted would have to come in to read Green Eggs and Ham.

Regards,

D-Ray

[Tom Joad]

Lets not descend and parallel how the politicians behave on both sides, put pay our respects....

Do what you think is best.

I'll pass.

[Boreas]

Ted would have to come in to read Green Eggs and Ham.

Regards,

D-Ray

Yertle the Turtle.

[Coolidge23]

I'll say it with no problem,

Rot in Hell you Son of a Bitch.

Same thing I said when Chappaquiddick Ted bought the farm.

[CarlV]

Nice resizing job. :D


Carl

[Coolidge23]

I hope the GOP Borks whichever leftist scumbag it is that Barry Sotero offers up.

[icenine]

Can the court hear cases with less than 9 members?

[icenine]

If I was Obama I would a pick a Latino with moderate to conservative leanings, someone appointed by a Republican before...

[d-ray657]

If I was Obama I would a pick a Latino with moderate to conservative leanings, someone appointed by a Republican before...

Where's Earl Warren when you need him?

Regards,

D-Ray

[bobabode]

Can the court hear cases with less than 9 members?

It appears so.

'If Republicans block Obama’s Supreme Court nomination, he wins anyway'

"After Justice Antonin Scalia’s death Saturday at 79, the Supreme Court is now evenly divided between four liberal justices and four conservatives, even with Anthony Kennedy’s occasional swings. What a moment for Scalia to depart: The court faces a wild array of closely divided decisions. It is an election year. And President Obama has stacked the lower circuit courts with Democrats. Obama has been chewing on his legacy for months. Fate has handed him the opportunity of any presidency — to swing the balance of the Supreme Court from conservative to liberal." WaPo

https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2016/02/13/if-republicans-block-obamas-supreme-court-nomination-he-wins-anyway/?hpid=hp_no-name_opinion-card-e%3Ahomepage%2Fstory

[donquixote99]

Can the court hear cases with less than 9 members?

Yes. Quorum is six. Someone was saying though that cases decided with less than nine can be reconsidered later. Ties count as upholding the lower court.

[Rajoo]

Yes. Quorum is six. Someone was saying though that cases decided with less than nine can be reconsidered later. Ties count as upholding the lower court.

I don't see a quorum mentioned here. From what I gather, all justices must hear every case that is accepted and vote on it. Also from what I have read, when there is a tie (one seat is vacant), the lower court order stays. So I guess this means that the case can be heard again by the full court.

Not trying to challenge you, just entering into a discussion. I believe that this is a much bigger issue for now than the upcoming election.

http://www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-courts/educational-resources/about-educational-outreach/activity-resources/supreme-1

[BlueStreak]

Well, aint that a bitch?

Oh, Geez my bad!

RIP Assho...........

Gaw! There I go again!

Oh, well.

[donquixote99]

I don't see a quorum mentioned here. From what I gather, all justices must hear every case that is accepted and vote on it. Also from what I have read, when there is a tie (one seat is vacant), the lower court order stays. So I guess this means that the case can be heard again by the full court.

Not trying to challenge you, just entering into a discussion. I believe that this is a much bigger issue for now than the upcoming election.

http://www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-courts/educational-resources/about-educational-outreach/activity-resources/supreme-1

Challenge away, I don't mind disagreement and I'm perfectly capable of being wrong. I only get prickly when people are insulting pricks about it.... :)

Someone elsewhere asserted there was a 2/3 = quorum rule, that's all I know about that. We are agreed in any case that 8 can rule, and if they tie nothing is overturned.

[Rajoo]

Here is a good comment by a Charlie Cook, nonpartisan political analyst.
“Maybe a Supreme Court vacancy will remind people that presidential elections are not circuses — they really are important,” said Charlie Cook, a nonpartisan political analyst. “The stakes just went up, and now everyone knows it.”

A great opportunity for President Obama to nominate someone who regardless of whether the person gets confirmed can cause significant political interference in the upcoming elections. In other words a 'screw you McConnell and the horse you rode in'.

Here is a good Lefty Times article on this. :)

http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-scalia-campaign-20160213-story.html

Another good point this article brings up is the status of the case regarding Obama's EO on 5 million illegals living in the US. What becomes of this case now?

[68custom]

personally I think the common dude knows very little about the SCOTUS or any of the other three branches. some one may be able to stir up controversy over the needs to appoint a new judge, but I do not see the Trump crowd being overly concerned. They just want the wall.
here is info on a interesting survey, though a bit old..
http://www.annenbergpublicpolicycenter.org/americans-know-surprisingly-little-about-their-government-survey-finds/

[djv8ga]

I think that most of the senators in his own party would reject him.

Regards,

D-Ray
So they would treat one of their own the same way as they will treat Obama's nominee?

[Boreas]

If I was Obama I would a pick a Latino with moderate to conservative leanings, someone appointed by a Republican before...

You mean someone who would vote with Roberts, Alito and Thomas most of the time?

[Boreas]

So they would treat one of their own the same way as they will treat Obama's nominee?

I don't think the Republicans in the Senate think of Cruz as one of their own. You don't accuse a former Republican Senator of treason or call your Leader a liar, both in open session, and get away with it.

[djv8ga]

I don't think the Republicans in the Senate think of Cruz as one of their own. You don't accuse a former Republican Senator of treason or call your Leader a liar, both in open session, and get away with it.
It's not a matter of what the idiots think, it's the fact that they would block the nomination of a Republican. Don't forget that in this scenario, Trump would have already kicked their sorry butts for trying to block his nomination.
That would be so over the top, the national guard would need to be called out to protect every RNC cave in the country.

[mpholland]

All I know is that I would much rather see an Obama appointment soon than anything by Clinton or Trump in the future.

[Rajoo]

All I know is that I would much rather see an Obama appointment soon than anything by Clinton or Trump in the future.

Agree with you. Best is to take the battle to Mitch and force the issue. Here is a shortlist published by Politico, and since Loretta Lynch is on the list, why not Eric Holder? He will give the GOP Senate all they can handle during the nomination fight.

Obama's Supreme Court short list

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/02/antonin-scalia-replacement-219271

[icenine]

You mean someone who would vote with Roberts, Alito and Thomas most of the time?

It is a gamble but he won't be able to get a Holder type selected. Plus outright opposition to a Latino choice would show the true colors of the GOP and put them in a very negative light in November so they might approve such a choice so as to not embarrass themselves....I know that bridge has been crossed already lol.

As D-Ray says we could get a Warren....

[CarlV]

I think an African American who hasn't turned his back on his own kind and would end all the social programs that got him where he is today is in order.


Carl

[Boreas]

It is a gamble but he won't be able to get a Holder type selected. Plus outright opposition to a Latino choice would show the true colors of the GOP and put them in a very negative light in November so they might approve such a choice so as to not embarrass themselves....I know that bridge has been crossed already lol.

As D-Ray says we could get a Warren....

So, he should make a cynical appointment based solely on scoring political points?

[Boreas]

I think an African American who hasn't turned his back on his own kind and would end all the social programs that got him where he is today is in order.


Carl

Van Jones? ;)

[icenine]

It's not a matter of what the idiots think, it's the fact that they would block the nomination of a Republican. Don't forget that in this scenario, Trump would have already kicked their sorry butts for trying to block his nomination.
That would be so over the top, the national guard would need to be called out to protect every RNC cave in the country.

The Democrats did not block Kennedy during Reagan's last year, and gave Bork a hearing and vote. McConnel and the baggers don't want to show Obama the same courtesy because he is black. They wouldn't do this to a white President.

[djv8ga]

I think an African American who hasn't turned his back on his own kind and would end all the social programs that got him where he is today is in order.


Carl
Charles Barkley?

[CarlV]

The Democrats did not block Kennedy during Reagan's last year, and gave Bork a hearing and vote. McConnel and the baggers don't want to show Obama the same courtesy because he is black. They wouldn't do this to a white President.

Absolutely. The crime of the people electing a non white President must never happen again.

Carl

[djv8ga]

The Democrats did not block Kennedy during Reagan's last year, and gave Bork a hearing and vote. McConnel and the baggers don't want to show Obama the same courtesy because he is black. They wouldn't do this to a white President.
I really hope you don't believe the B.S. you post. :rolleyes:
Obama sucks & your party is hemorrhaging seats @ every level because of him.
It's your fault for electing an idiot, not because of the jerk's color. :rolleyes:

[Rajoo]

I really hope you don't believe the B.S. you post. :rolleyes:
Obama sucks & your party is hemorrhaging seats @ every level because of him.
It's your fault for electing an idiot, not because of the jerk's color. :rolleyes:

And I hope you are doing the same. :rolleyes:

Edit: Looks like you are becoming unhinged like your current hero.

[Dondilion]

The Repubs are going to play hardball.

Obama should nominate a very qualified Hispanic centrist.

A bait for rabid Repubs to outdo themselves.

[djv8ga]

Loretta Lynch is on the list, why not Eric Holder?

Obama's Supreme Court short list

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/02/antonin-scalia-replacement-219271
Because Lynch can indict Clinton. Sounds like a fair deal to me.

[CarlV]

I really hope you don't believe the B.S. you post. :rolleyes:
Obama sucks & your party is hemorrhaging seats @ every level because of him.

Uh oh, are you are down to the phony talking points? :eek:

It is more like Democratic idiots letting the GOP do the redistricting and doing nothing about it.


Carl

[Dondilion]

It is more like Democratic idiots letting the GOP do the redistricting and doing nothing about it.


Carl

The Dems have a weak hand.

[icenine]

I really hope you don't believe the B.S. you post. :rolleyes:
Obama sucks & your party is hemorrhaging seats @ every level because of him.
It's your fault for electing an idiot, not because of the jerk's color. :rolleyes:

Well you came on with some bullshit about how the Democrats would do the same as the GOP if the situation was reversed. Recent history and my 53 years on the planet proves your statement to be non-valid. You may want to bone up on American history before you start posting. Or perhaps you are buying into the current GOP theory of "relativism" when it comes to historical facts.

[CarlV]

The Dems have a weak leadership.



Fixed that for you. :)


Carl

[icenine]

So, he should make a cynical appointment based solely on scoring political points?

You have to be realistic John. Obama, like Reagan in 86, will have to at least mold his choice to the Senate that he has to work with. I would love to see Holder on the court...it ain't going to happen. If there is a moderate GOP justice who represents a middle ground that might be ok for this Senate during a very contentious election year Obama may have to go with that.


My Hillary thread aside, but imagine if the world ended and Bernie lost and Trump got the choice instead of Obama.

[Rajoo]

.................................................. ....................

My Hillary thread aside, but imagine if the world ended and Bernie lost and Trump got the choice instead of Obama.

You want the world to end, Obama should nominate none other than Ted Cruz. He has the education, experience, is Hispanic, young, energetic, etc. Both parties will go absolutely postal and the world will end. :)

Seriously though Obama should nominate Eric Holder, he will never get voted but will wear the GOP Senators down to the extent that there will be no fight left in them.

[bobabode]

I'd like to see Holder or Warren take Scalia's seat. :)

[icenine]

You want the world to end, Obama should nominate none other than Ted Cruz. He has the education, experience, is Hispanic, young, energetic, etc. Both parties will go absolutely postal and the world will end. :)

Seriously though Obama should nominate Eric Holder, he will never get voted but will wear the GOP Senators down to the extent that there will be no fight left in them.

That wouldn't be fair to Holder. Obama needs to nominate someone who can get past the Senate but who at the same time would put the GOP in the most ugliest position if they blocked said nominee just on the basis of their hatred of the President.

Perhaps in Hillary's second term when she has a super Dem majority she can get Holder through....:)

[Rex E.]

I'd like to see Holder or Warren take Scalia's seat. :)

I'd like to see Warren take Obama's current seat. She can then appoint both Obama and Holder as seats open.....:D

[Boreas]

You have to be realistic John. Obama, like Reagan in 86, will have to at least mold his choice to the Senate that he has to work with. I would love to see Holder on the court...it ain't going to happen. If there is a moderate GOP justice who represents a middle ground that might be ok for this Senate during a very contentious election year Obama may have to go with that.


My Hillary thread aside, but imagine if the world ended and Bernie lost and Trump got the choice instead of Obama.

I don't have to be if I don't want to! You can't make me!

Really, the Republican controlled Senate is already on record here. They ain't confirming nobody nohow. The best we can hope for is the recess appointment of someone who would be acceptable to either Hillary or Bernie. Then, when it comes time to make that justice a permanent appointment, the Republicans will be backed into a corner with their "let the people decide" bullshit.

[bobabode]

One added benefit for the Dems of a messy fight is that the (R)s are defending 25 Senate seats in November to the (D)s 10 seats.

[Rajoo]

One added benefit for the Dems of a messy fight is that the (R)s are defending 25 Senate seats in November to the (D)s 10 seats.

If the recess appointment is not palatable to the GOP, wouldn't they turn this into a rallying cry? And if Hillary is the nominee, lot of the independents may not show up to vote to avoid the stench. :)

How about Colin Powell and he doesn't need to have a law degree? Afterall he supported Obama. ;)

[Boreas]

Since the GOPers aren't going to confirm anyone, it might be smart to nominate a progressive non-corporatist justice and let it sit until after the election. In the meantime, the SCOTUS sits without their most ideological right winger but still has RBG, Breyer, Sotomayor and Kagan. Kennedy is still the swing vote but he now represents the difference between a more or less progressive decision and a tie.

[icenine]

How does this recess option work?

I am thinking that there has to be at least a minute break between an old session and new session of Congress lol....

[finnbow]

How does this recess option work?

I am thinking that there has to be at least a minute break between an old session and new session of Congress lol....

A new session of Congress doesn't occur until new Congresscritters are seated after the election.

As for a Senate recess, I think McConnell can call one whenever he wants (or not). Unless he formally calls a recess, the Senate isn't in recess even if the halls of Congress are empty (or so found a recent SCOTUS decision when Obama did recess appointments to the NRLB when McConnell hadn't formally called a recess). McConnell (or a designee) can gavel the Senate into session every 3 days or during a long absence just to be able to say it has never been out of session. The whole thing is explained here (http://www.politico.com/story/2014/06/supreme-court-recess-appointments-108347).

[BlueStreak]

You want the world to end, Obama should nominate none other than Ted Cruz. He has the education, experience, is Hispanic, young, energetic, etc. Both parties will go absolutely postal and the world will end. :)

Seriously though Obama should nominate Eric Holder, he will never get voted but will wear the GOP Senators down to the extent that there will be no fight left in them.

And tell Cruz;

"I thought you might need the job after you lose the election to a Democrat.":p

[icenine]

If this missive from the camp of the enemy is correct then Obama could appoint someone right now:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/02/13/obama-has-rare-parliamentary-window-to-make-recess-appointment-to-succeed-scalia.html

Do it Barry ....go nuclear!

[Tom Joad]

If this missive from the camp of the enemy is correct then Obama could appoint someone right now:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/02/13/obama-has-rare-parliamentary-window-to-make-recess-appointment-to-succeed-scalia.html

Do it Barry ....go nuclear!

He doesn't have a hair on his ass if he doesn't.

[finnbow]

If this missive from the camp of the enemy is correct then Obama could appoint someone right now:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/02/13/obama-has-rare-parliamentary-window-to-make-recess-appointment-to-succeed-scalia.html

Do it Barry ....go nuclear!

That would be awesome. I checked the Senate's webpage and the next session doesn't start until Feb 22. Do it, Barry!!!

[icenine]

That would be awesome. I checked the Senate's webpage and the next session doesn't start until Feb 22. Do it, Barry!!!


McConnell has come out saying no under any circumstances...
Obama would be justified.

[bobabode]

Somebody should start a petition at WhiteHouse.gov. Do it, Mr. President! :D

[CarlV]

McConnell has come out saying no under any circumstances...
Obama would be justified.

+1

Somebody should start a petition at WhiteHouse.gov. Do it, Mr. President! :D

+1

That would be awesome. I checked the Senate's webpage and the next session doesn't start until Feb 22. Do it, Barry!!!

+1

What are you waiting for Mr Obama? :)

Carl

[bobabode]

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov//petition/appoint-replacement-justice-scalia-using-recess-appointment-february-22nd-time-sensitive

FWIW...:) Pass it along.

[Tom Joad]

Somebody should start a petition at WhiteHouse.gov. Do it, Mr. President! :D

He won't.

He's too much of a wuss.

[bobabode]

I read somewhere that Brennan was appointed by Ike during a recess. There's a precedent.

[bobabode]

He won't.

He's too much of a wuss.

Just sign it and pass it along to your Berniac friends.
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov//petition/appoint-replacement-justice-scalia-using-recess-appointment-february-22nd-time-sensitive

[donquixote99]

Actually, he should appoint someone in the next 15 minutes. McConnell may have a way to pro-forma reconvene the Senate earlier than the 22nd.

[CarlV]

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov//petition/appoint-replacement-justice-scalia-using-recess-appointment-february-22nd-time-sensitive

FWIW...:) Pass it along.

Coolness, done. :)


Carl

[bobabode]

Coolness, done. :)


Carl

Thanks Carl. :)

[CarlV]

Obama has to respond if there is 100k sigs, right?


Carl

[bobabode]

Obama has to respond if there is 100k sigs, right?


Carl

Right but he only has 7 days to act.

[finnbow]

Obama has to respond if there is 100k sigs, right?


Carl

He doesn't have to act. He has to consider acting on the petition (something I'm sure administration attorneys are working overtime on over the (Federal) holiday weekend.

[CarlV]

Yeah, he was probably advised on doing exactly this yesterday. A good thing, the Republicans are not going to do the right thing for our country so he needs to. :)


Carl

[icenine]

Being counter-intuitive but your average rotten-borough Tea Bagger Congresscritter would love for Obama to appoint someone so they could raise tons of donated dough and have another bloody flag for them to raise in upcoming re-election campaigns. Maybe that is what McConnell wants.

[Coolidge23]

Scalia's dead.

I wonder if Thomas is next.

Soetoro needs to cement his legacy.

[bobabode]

If nothing else, this proves to the electorate who the dirty dawg obstructionists and the real anti-constitutionalists are.
The Repubs are like the rodeo clown who got caught on the needle sharp horns of a dilemma. Bleed, shit or go blind. :D

[Rajoo]

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov//petition/appoint-replacement-justice-scalia-using-recess-appointment-february-22nd-time-sensitive

FWIW...:) Pass it along.

Done. So far just a few of us on the forum have signed this.
I have forwarded the link to MoveOn.org and hope it gets to the right hands.
And thank Bob for your service (just wanted to sound like an insincere Repub politician :))

[Boreas]

Done. So far just a few of us on the forum have signed this.
I have forwarded the link to MoveOn.org and hope it gets to the right hands.
And thank Bob for your service (just wanted to sound like an insincere Repub politician :))

Me too.

Not a member but Democratic Underground might be a place to post this too.

[Rex E.]

I left it with a few friends I know that would spread it through facebook.....

[Tom Joad]

Just sign it and pass it along to your Berniac friends.
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov//petition/appoint-replacement-justice-scalia-using-recess-appointment-february-22nd-time-sensitive

No.

Our Metrosexual Girlie Man of a President shouldn't need a petition to put on his big boy pants and do the right thing for a change.

[Rajoo]

No.

Our Metrosexual Girlie Man of a President shouldn't need a petition to put on his big boy pants and do the right thing for a change.

Key word here is help, as in helping the President make a popular decision or in this case, making a prospective and imminent decision popular. If you don't believe in this, you shouldn't be looking at or quoting polls.

[Boreas]

What we need is a president who immediately does everything TJ wants instead of a girlie man who thinks he has to consider the will of the people.

[Tom Joad]

Key word here is help, as in helping the President make a popular decision or in this case, making a prospective and imminent decision popular. If you don't believe in this, you shouldn't be looking at or quoting polls.

I'm not looking at polls. I'm looking at Obama's record. He's weak and I'm sick of being disappointed by him. I don't feel like signing a petition that I know won't do any good. That puts me in the position of begging a weakling to do something that I know good and well he hasn't got the stones to do.

[Boreas]

I'm not looking at polls. I'm looking at Obama's record. He's weak and I'm sick of being disappointed by him. I don't feel like signing a petition that I know won't do any good. That puts me in the position of begging a weakling to do something that I know good and well he hasn't got the stones to do.

He had the guts to take care of Scalia.

And Trump needs to cover his six.

http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/alex-jones-obama-murdered-justice-scalia-and-donald-trump-next

[finnbow]

I'm not looking at polls. I'm looking at Obama's record. He's weak and I'm sick of being disappointed by him. I don't feel like signing a petition that I know won't do any good. That puts me in the position of begging a weakling to do something that I know good and well he hasn't got the stones to do.

He's definitely got the stones to do it, particularly in his last year when he has no more f*cks to give. OTOH, I think the Democrats are strategizing as to what strategy will play best in the upcoming election. If they think this will help them win the election, it's a win-win. If they play their cards right, they win the Presidency, possibly the Senate and then would be able to appoint a justice more liberal than they otherwise could.

At this point in DC, everything being done by anybody (including the GOP in this instance) is with an eye on the November election.

[CarlV]

He had the guts to pull the trigger on the probability of where to find Bin Laden and to take him out.
That was huge! :p

Carl

[Rajoo]

I'm not looking at polls. I'm looking at Obama's record. He's weak and I'm sick of being disappointed by him. I don't feel like signing a petition that I know won't do any good. That puts me in the position of begging a weakling to do something that I know good and well he hasn't got the stones to do.

"My way or the Highway", is there a country song with that title? I bet you could find us a YouTube video. ;)

I am convinced that this decision will have far reaching ramifications, for his Presidency, the party and the upcoming elections, and the SCOTUS. After all it is a lifetime appointment. So with the petition, we are helping to ease the decision making process.

[Tom Joad]

He had the guts to take care of Scalia.

And Trump needs to cover his six.

http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/alex-jones-obama-murdered-justice-scalia-and-donald-trump-next

Took care of Scalia? :rolleyes:

According to what I've read Scalia was 5 foot 7 inches tall, and just looking at him, I say he weighed in close to 300 lbs. And he was going to turn 80 next month. It's amazing that fat little Guinea lasted as long as he did before dying of a heart attack.

[CarlV]

He's definitely got the stones to do it, particularly in his last year when he has no more f*cks to give. OTOH, I think the Democrats are strategizing as to what strategy will play best in the upcoming election. If they think this will help them win the election, it's a win-win. If they play their cards right, they win the Presidency, possibly the Senate and then would be able to appoint a justice more liberal than they otherwise could.

At this point in DC, everything being done by anybody (including the GOP in this instance) is with an eye on the November election.
This too, it is a blessing this "how conservative can you be" is when it comes to elections on a national level.

Carl

[Tom Joad]

He had the guts to pull the trigger on the probability of where to find Bin Laden and to take him out.
That was huge! :p

Carl

Do you really think we've been told the whole story on that?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N3COsYaJ47o

What I do know is that he caved to the Insurance companies, the Drug companies, and the Republicans on Health Care, which is why we're stuck with that abortion known as Obamacare instead of Medicare for all.

In 2008 we elected him President and gave him majorities in both houses of congress. And he managed to squander that plus we lost about a dozen state house and legislatures to boot.

[CarlV]

He may have tried harder than he should have in reaching across the aisle, letting the goppers kick sand in his face.


Carl

[Rajoo]

Let's say Obama does make an recess appointment. McConnell & Co. go berserk, challenge the constitutionality and the case goes to the Supreme Court. The newly appointed justice must be recused and the vote is a tie. This could get pretty ugly and totally disrupt the upcoming elections. We could be looking at a serious political divide unlike say, Obamacare. A single person or an entity can turn the country upside down.

[Tom Joad]

Let's say Obama does make an recess appointment. McConnell & Co. go berserk, challenge the constitutionality and the case goes to the Supreme Court. The newly appointed justice must be recused and the vote is a tie. This could get pretty ugly and totally disrupt the upcoming elections. We could be looking at a serious political divide unlike say, Obamacare. A single person or an entity can turn the country upside down.

I guess thats as good an excuse as any for Obama to fold with the winning hand he has been delt.

[icenine]

Obama may be playing the long game again...pick someone so popular and likeable that an unbalanced opposition by the GOP makes them looks so bad before the election that the Dems win or the GOP simply capitulates and gives him the ratification.

Although if I was Obama I would put a real progressive or someone like Holder in right now, and gamble that the Dems win, and his nominee eventually gets ratified two years later. That is the longer game and that is what I would do if I was him.

[Tom Joad]

Now this looks like a good play.

I would cut Obama some slack on passing up the recess appointment if he makes this one.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/02/15/the-gop-s-worst-nightmare-scotus-nominee.html

The GOP’s Worst Nightmare SCOTUS Nominee
Tino Cuellar. California judge. Mexican-American. Harvard. Yale. Stanford. How many Latino votes you think the GOP’d get if they block him?

[icenine]

Let's say Obama does make an recess appointment. McConnell & Co. go berserk, challenge the constitutionality and the case goes to the Supreme Court. The newly appointed justice must be recused and the vote is a tie. This could get pretty ugly and totally disrupt the upcoming elections. We could be looking at a serious political divide unlike say, Obamacare. A single person or an entity can turn the country upside down.

I don't think the average American is all that caught up with who is on the Supreme Court...
I don't see this as big as Obamacare. The baggers will howl but they have been doing that for five or six years now. The GOP could raise a lot of money off of an Obama recess appointment.....keep the tea bag movement going. But I think the issue would fade away after the election and I doubt it would be the reason why a Democrat lost to say Trump. God forbid.

A recess appointment of a progressive who would uphold his executive actions on immigration would motivate Latinos to show up at the polls however.

[Rex E.]

He had the guts to take care of Scalia.

And Trump needs to cover his six.

http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/alex-jones-obama-murdered-justice-scalia-and-donald-trump-next

Don't the Clinton's have a better network set up for murdering people...I can't believe AJ missed what was right in front of him, an obvious misdirection to Obama to take the heat off Hill's....AJ is slippin.....

:D

[Rajoo]

Another good writeup on the SCOTUS nomination, surprisingly a recess appointment is not discussed.

The Daily 202: Why blocking Obama’s pick to replace Scalia could cost Republicans their Senate majority

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/paloma/daily-202/2016/02/15/daily-202-why-blocking-obama-s-pick-to-replace-scalia-could-cost-republicans-their-senate-majority/56c13943981b92a22d189bff/

[Rajoo]

I don't think the average American is all that caught up with who is on the Supreme Court...
I don't see this as big as Obamacare. The baggers will howl but they have been doing that for five or six years now. The GOP could raise a lot of money off of an Obama recess appointment.....keep the tea bag movement going. But I think the issue would fade away after the election and I doubt it would be the reason why a Democrat lost to say Trump. God forbid.

A recess appointment of a progressive who would uphold his executive actions on immigration would motivate Latinos to show up at the polls however.

Anything Obama can do to destabilize the GOP is fair game. Your Godess is already politicking in Nevada on this hoping to energize the Hispanic's. As we have seen, money is not helping much in this election other than for Bernie.

[Boreas]

Now this looks like a good play.

I would cut Obama some slack on passing up the recess appointment if he makes this one.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/02/15/the-gop-s-worst-nightmare-scotus-nominee.html

They're not going to get any Hispanic votes anyway except for some very old South Florida Cubans

[Boreas]

Let's say Obama does make an recess appointment. McConnell & Co. go berserk, challenge the constitutionality and the case goes to the Supreme Court. The newly appointed justice must be recused and the vote is a tie. This could get pretty ugly and totally disrupt the upcoming elections. We could be looking at a serious political divide unlike say, Obamacare. A single person or an entity can turn the country upside down.

It needs to get ugly.

[Boreas]

Obama may be playing the long game again...pick someone so popular and likeable that an unbalanced opposition by the GOP makes them looks so bad before the election that the Dems win or the GOP simply capitulates and gives him the ratification.

Although if I was Obama I would put a real progressive or someone like Holder in right now, and gamble that the Dems win, and his nominee eventually gets ratified two years later. That is the longer game and that is what I would do if I was him.

Being hated by Republicans doesn't make Holder a progressive. It just makes him black. Holder is no progressive. He's a Wall Street and bankster shill.

[finnbow]

WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)—In a television appearance on Sunday, the leading Senate Republican warned President Obama “in no uncertain terms” against doing anything in his remaining three hundred and forty days in office.

“The President should be aware that, for all intents and purposes, his term in office is already over,” Mitch McConnell said on Fox News. “It’s not the time to start doing things when you have a mere eight thousand one hundred and sixty hours left.”

While acknowledging that the President has eleven months remaining in the White House, McConnell said that he and the President “have an honest disagreement about how long eleven months is.”

“The President believes it is almost one year,” he said. “I believe it is almost zero years. I’m not a mathematician, but I believe I am right.”

As for how Obama should spend his remaining time in office, McConnell said, “If the President has trouble doing nothing, we will be more than happy to show him how it is done.”

[Tom Joad]

I don't think the average American is all that caught up with who is on the Supreme Court...

You might have a point there.

http://ffcolorado.com/blog/two-thirds-of-americans-cant-name-any-u-s-supreme-court-justices-says-new-survey/

Nearly two-thirds of Americans can’t name a single member of the United States Supreme Court, according to a new national survey by FindLaw.com (www.findlaw.com).

[icenine]

Being hated by Republicans doesn't make Holder a progressive. It just makes him black. Holder is no progressive. He's a Wall Street and bankster shill.

Did you not notice the word "or" John? I imagine on issues of justice he would swerve a bit toward where Cory Booker and Rand Paul were going last year.

[Boreas]

Did you not notice the word "or" John?

I guess I didn't attach the meaning to the word that you intended.

[Rajoo]

You might have a point there.
Quote:
Nearly two-thirds of Americans can’t name a single member of the United States Supreme Court, according to a new national survey by FindLaw.com.

http://ffcolorado.com/blog/two-thirds-of-americans-cant-name-any-u-s-supreme-court-justices-says-new-survey/

They should be surveying the kindergartners. :D

https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQ9MlOLuAxUo3ZSZippH5u907BiXo7yT v6XhetIAI_0Jq54T9_LlQ

[finnbow]

I don't think the average American is all that caught up with who is on the Supreme Court...

I think you're right about the "average American." OTOH, the GOP base has been whipped into such a frenzy for the last 7 years by Fox and talk radio over how Obama is actively trying to destroy America. Now these same propagandists are telling them that the next SCOTUS appointment is the last straw on the march to Armageddon.

[Boreas]

I think you're right about the "average American." OTOH, the GOP base has been whipped into such a frenzy for the last 7 years by Fox and talk radio over how Obama is actively trying to destroy America. Now these same propagandists are telling them that the next SCOTUS appointment is the last straw on the march to Armageddon.

Cruz said precisely that on the stump today.

[finnbow]

Cruz said precisely that on the stump today.

Of course. Nothing's too low for that deceitful prick.

[bobabode]

Harry Reid lays it out. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/reid-to-gop-for-the-good-of-the-country-stop-your-nakedly-partisan-obstruction/2016/02/15/07f225e8-d42d-11e5-b195-2e29a4e13425_story.html?hpid=hp_no-name_opinion-card-d%3Ahomepage%2Fstory

[Coolidge23]

I think you're right about the "average American." OTOH, the GOP base has been whipped into such a frenzy for the last 7 years by Fox and talk radio over how Obama is actively trying to destroy America. Now these same propagandists are telling them that the next SCOTUS appointment is the last straw on the march to Armageddon.

Sort of like the left was doing when W was in office huh?

[Coolidge23]

Harry Reid lays it out. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/reid-to-gop-for-the-good-of-the-country-stop-your-nakedly-partisan-obstruction/2016/02/15/07f225e8-d42d-11e5-b195-2e29a4e13425_story.html?hpid=hp_no-name_opinion-card-d%3Ahomepage%2Fstory

Harry Reid is a world class scumbag.

[finnbow]

Sort of like the left was doing when W was in office huh?

The left doesn't listen to Fox or talk radio. Morever, Dubya took us into an unneeded war and crashed the economy, both things worthy of being upset about. What has Obama done to get the Right so pissed? Expanded health coverage?

[finnbow]

Harry Reid is a world class scumbag...

... who happens to be on the right side of this argument.

[icenine]

Should the Democrats take back the Senate they actually convene 3 January...enough room
to get a nominee through if they change cloture rules for SCOTUS candidates.

[Coolidge23]

Should the Democrats take back the Senate they actually convene 3 January...enough room
to get a nominee through if they change cloture rules for SCOTUS candidates.

That's not going to happen.

[donquixote99]

Sort of like the left was doing when W was in office huh?

Oh yes. During W's term in office:

1. W did not, with shameless deception, take us into an unnecessary, hidiously-expensive war of utterly evil effect.

2. The world economy was not plunged into chaos by a ruinous crash of the laxly-regulated investment banking system.

It was all just propaganda. Right.

[Coolidge23]

Oh yes. During W's term in office:

1. W did not, with shameless deception, take us into an unnecessary, hidiously-expensive war of utterly evil effect.

2. The world economy was not plunged into chaos by a ruinous crash of the laxly-regulated investment banking system.

It was all just propaganda. Right.


1. You mean the one that Hillary and many other Democrats voted for? That war?

2. Was it W that repealed Glass-Steagall? IS nothing outside the US or the US presidency affecting the world economy?

I think that both Obama and Bush have been horrible for this country. Good lucking getting one of you moonbats to be objective in acknowledging the damage Barry's done.

The looney left always likes to accuse the GOP/conservatives of fear mongering when they engage in it themselves........the planet's going to go to hell, women's right are being taken away, christian theocracy, they're going to ruin social security blah blah blah......


Glenn Greenwald hit the nail on the head when he proclaimed that progressives are the most intellectually dishonest people there are today.

[donquixote99]

The left doesn't listen to Fox or talk radio. Morever, Dubya took us into an unneeded war and crashed the economy, both things worthy of being upset about. What has Obama done to get the Right so pissed? Expanded health coverage?

What Obama has done to get the right so pissed can be clearly seen here:

http://www2.pictures.zimbio.com/gi/Jeff+Gordon+Barack+Obama+Obama+Honors+NASCAR+1T7ZW YaOATkl.jpg

[donquixote99]

...blah blah blah......



1. Right, Hillary was just as responsible as the PRESIDENT and his administration in starting that war.

2. You mean the Republicans now like Glass-Stegal and want it back?

Moonbats? Looney? And speaking of intellectual dishonesty, why don't you own all your own name-calling, instead of going for the pseudo-authority of putting it in a contextless quote from another writer?

[CarlV]

Neither Hillary or the rest of the world would have backed us up if GWB had not lied to us. It is not just repealing one thing,Glass-Stegal, that did the 2007 crash. It took more, just like a jet plane crashing, and that why it's best not to have a coirrupt dumbass in charge.

Carl

[CarlV]

Glenn Greenwald hit the nail on the head when he proclaimed that progressives are the most intellectually dishonest people there are today.

Oh, you listen to one of those jerks who makes a very good living spinning the truth, that explains a lot.


Carl

[Coolidge23]

1. Right, Hillary was just as responsible as the PRESIDENT and his administration in starting that war.

2. You mean the Republicans now like Glass-Stegal and want it back?

Moonbats? Looney? And speaking of intellectual dishonesty, why don't you own all your own name-calling, instead of going for the pseudo-authority of putting it in a contextless quote from another writer?

The point is that many Democrats in Congress voted in favor of the Iraq war, including Hillary.

What do Republican feels on Glass_Steagall have to do with the fact that it was Bill Clinton who repealed it?

I've been called a racist, xeonophobe sexist etc etc so many times that it's an instinctual reaction. If you want context search for the Greenwald video on youtube yourself.

[Coolidge23]

Neither Hillary or the rest of the world would have backed us up if GWB had not lied to us. It is not just repealing one thing,Glass-Stegal, that did the 2007 crash. It took more, just like a jet plane crashing, and that why it's best not to have a coirrupt dumbass in charge.

Carl

Yup. Dems good, GOP bad. Must not stray from the company line.

That's some primo objective, critical thinking you're engaging in there pal.

[CarlV]

Yup. Dems good, GOP bad. Must not stray from the company line.

That's some primo objective, critical thinking you're engaging in there pal.

Ah, so you got nothing to add. If there was one thing or person that caused the crash it was the advice of Alan Greenspan more than anything else. And yes I will vote Democrat if that's the choice of two, The GOP since Reagan keeps crashing our economy when in office and I won't vote for more until they become fiscally responsible.


Carl

[Tom Joad]

Neither Hillary or the rest of the world would have backed us up if GWB had not lied to us.

I could see plain as day back in the fall of 2002 that he was lying his ass off about Iraq, so I'm sure as Hell sure Hillary knew it too.

I had him pegged as an Evil lying son of a bitch from the first time I saw that smarmy little smirk of his in the first Republican debate back in 2000. There is nothing I hate more than a smirker. William Kristol is another one. Chris Wallace is yet another one.

[Coolidge23]

I could see plain as day back in the fall of 2002 that he was lying his ass off about Iraq, so I'm sure as Hell sure Hillary knew it too.

I had him pegged as an Evil lying son of a bitch from the first time I saw that smarmy little smirk of his in the first Republican debate back in 2000. It was instant hate.

It seemed to me like he had a huge chip on his shoulder that Saddam tried to have his daddy whacked. He had a grudge to settle and he settled it all right.

Hillary is no better. The lives of our troops mean nothing to her. They'd just be pawns. She truly thinks she's of a better species than us mere mortals.

We had our chance with Ron Paul and we blew it.

[CarlV]

The point is that many Democrats in Congress voted in favor of the Iraq war, including Hillary.

What do Republican feels on Glass_Steagall have to do with the fact that it was Bill Clinton who repealed it?

I've been called a racist, xeonophobe sexist etc etc so many times that it's an instinctual reaction. If you want context search for the Greenwald video on youtube yourself.

Yup. Dems good, GOP bad. Must not stray from the company line.

That's some primo objective, critical thinking you're engaging in there pal.
“Those of us who have looked to the self-interest of lending institutions to protect shareholders’ equity, myself included, are in a state of shocked disbelief,” he told the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.

Now 82, Mr. Greenspan came in for one of the harshest grillings of his life, as Democratic lawmakers asked him time and again whether he had been wrong, why he had been wrong and whether he was sorry.

Critics, including many economists, now blame the former Fed chairman for the financial crisis that is tipping the economy into a potentially deep recession. Mr. Greenspan’s critics say that he encouraged the bubble in housing prices by keeping interest rates too low for too long and that he failed to rein in the explosive growth of risky and often fraudulent mortgage lending.

“You had the authority to prevent irresponsible lending practices that led to the subprime mortgage crisis. You were advised to do so by many others,” said Representative Henry A. Waxman of California, chairman of the committee. “Do you feel that your ideology pushed you to make decisions that you wish you had not made?”

Mr. Greenspan conceded: “Yes, I’ve found a flaw. I don’t know how significant or permanent it is. But I’ve been very distressed by that fact.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/24/business/economy/24panel.html?_r=0

Alan Greenspan Salary How much did Alan Greenspan make as Chairman of the Federal Reserve? $180,000 Alan Greenspan is an American economist, he has a net worth of $10 million. Alan Greenspan has earned his net worth as his former Chairman of the Federal Reserve of the United States, position he held from 1987 to 2006. Currently he owns his own consulting company called Greenspan Associates LLC, he works as a private advisor and he provides firms with consulting services. President Ronald Reagan first appointed to the Chairman position in August 1987, and reappointed at successive four-year intervals until retiring on January 31, 2006 after the second-longest tenure in the position. He was born in the Washington Heights area of New York City, on March 6, 1926. His father was of Romanian-Jewish descent Herbert Greenspan, and his mother Rose Goldsmith of Hungarian-Jewish descent. Greenspan describes himself as a "lifelong libertarian Republican", he was married to an artist named Joan Mitchell in 1952; the marriage ended in annulment less than a year later. He then married journalist Andrea Mitchell in 1997 the ceremony was performed by Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Greenspan received the highest civilian award in the United States, by President George W. Bush in November 2005.the award is called the Presidential Medal of Freedom. Some of Greenspan's most honorary titles include Commander of the French Legion d'honneur (Legion of Honor, 2000) and Knight Commander of the British Empire (2002). In 2006, Greenspan was awarded the Department of Defense Medal for distinguished Public Service. Greenspan received the Dwight D. Eisenhower Medal for Leadership and Service, in 2004, from Eisenhower Fellowships. He is also the first of the Harry S. Truman Medal for Economic Policy, presented by the Harry S. Truman Library Institute in 2005. Also in 2005 on December 14th, Greespan received an honorary Doctor of Commercial Science degree by NYU, his fourth degree from that institution. In 2007 he was presented by the University of Virginia, the inaugural Thomas Jefferson Foundation Medal in Citizen Leadership.
Alan Greenspan (/'ael?n '?ri:nspaen/; born March 6, 1926) is an American economist who served as Chairman of the Federal Reserve of the United States from 1987 to 2006. He currently works as a private adviser and provides consulting for firms through his company, Greenspan Associates LLC. First appointed Federal Reserve chairman by President Ronald Reagan in August 1987, he was reappointed at successive four-year intervals until retiring on January 31, 2006 after the second-longest tenure in the position.
Greenspan came to the Federal Reserve Board from a successful consulting career, holding political views influenced by Ayn Rand. Although he was subdued in his public appearances, favorable media coverage raised his profile to a point that several observers likened him to a "rock star". Democratic leaders of Congress criticized him for politicizing his office because of his support for Social Security privatization and tax cuts that they felt would increase the deficit. The easy-money policies of the Fed during Greenspan's tenure has been suggested to be a leading cause of the subprime mortgage crisis, which occurred within months of his departure from the Fed, and has, said the Wall Street Journal, "tarnished his image".
http://www.getnetworth.com/alan-greenspan-net-worth/


Maybe you need to correct these people about it being all Clinton's fault. :rolleyes:


Carl

[Rajoo]

It seemed to me like he had a huge chip on his shoulder that Saddam tried to have his daddy whacked. He had a grudge to settle and he settled it all right.

Hillary is no better. The lives of our troops mean nothing to her. They'd just be pawns. She truly thinks she's of a better species than us mere mortals.

We had our chance with Ron Paul and we blew it.

Why do you make such definitive proclamations?
We had a choice with Rand Paul? Mouse in your pocket is squeaking again.

[Tom Joad]

It seemed to me like he had a huge chip on his shoulder that Saddam tried to have his daddy whacked. He had a grudge to settle and he settled it all right.

Hillary is no better. The lives of our troops mean nothing to her. They'd just be pawns. She truly thinks she's of a better species than us mere mortals.

We had our chance with Ron Paul and we blew it.

Ron Paul was right on foreign policy, and wrong on everything else.

[Tom Joad]

The point is that many Democrats in Congress voted in favor of the Iraq war, including Hillary.

Too many did. Way too many and it cost Hillary my vote in the 2008 primary.

But it wasn't a majority of the Democrats in congress.

However on the Republican side the percentage voting in favor of it was in the high 90's. So your lame attempt to shift the blame to the Democrats fails.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Resolution

[Pio1980]

Ron Paul was right on foreign policy, and wrong on everything else.

Putting a Libertarian in charge is just risking handing the rest of the country over to Wall St. Without a responsible adult in the room to effectively enforce rules of behavior, the bullies always take over in short order. Wall St has repeatedly demonstrated that it cannot be trusted to regulate itself.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

[CarlV]

Ron Paul was right on foreign policy, and wrong on everything else.

+1


Carl

[Tom Joad]

I told you he was too much of a Wuss.

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/02/15/466849025/white-house-seems-to-rule-out-recess-appointment-to-replace-scalia

The White House says the president will not move to appoint a Supreme Court replacement for Justice Antonin Scalia while the Senate is in recess this week.

In an interview with ABC News, White House spokesman Eric Schultz said Obama would would wait to announce his nominee until Congress returns from its break later this month. In an email to NPR, Schultz said the White House had ruled out a recess appointment "this week."

[Coolidge23]

Maybe you need to correct these people about it being all Clinton's fault. :rolleyes:


Carl

I will, as soon as you correct those people about it being all W's fault.

[noonereal]

Hillary is no better. The lives of our troops mean nothing to her. They'd just be pawns. She truly thinks she's of a better species than us mere mortals.



wTF? How'ed you come up with this bit of hate?

BTW, Ron Paul raised a stereotypical spoiled rich kid punk with no understanding of circumstance folks often face. The kid made some outrageously ignorant statements that showed Rand, to me, in bad light.

I never saw a post of your previous, quite a first impression you left. :(

[Coolidge23]

wTF? How'ed you come up with this bit of hate?

BTW, Ron Paul raised a stereotypical spoiled rich kid punk with no understanding of circumstance folks often face. The kid made some outrageously ignorant statements that showed Ron, to me, in bad light.

I never saw a post of your previous, quite a first impression you left. :(

The kid? You mean Rand? I'd take him over that evil, rotten sociopath Hillary any day. Sorry if I stepped all over you gal but it's the truth.

[noonereal]

The kid? You mean Rand? I'd take him over that evil, rotten sociopath Hillary any day. Sorry if I stepped all over you gal but it's the truth.

I am not a Hill supporter but you are a hate machine.

[Boreas]

wTF? How'ed you come up with this bit of hate?

I never saw a post of your previous, quite a first impression you left. :(

Hate's all he's got, Ed. He's a very sad little man.

Check out post #110 in this thread. That should show you who you're dealing with.

[Coolidge23]

I am not a Hill supporter but you are a hate machine.

Is there something wrong with hating evil?

[noonereal]

Hate's all he's got, Ed. He's a very sad little man.

Check out post #110 in this thread. That should show you who you're dealing with.

oh well, let him talk to himself

[Tom Joad]

Hate's all he's got, Ed. He's a very sad little man.

Check out post #110 in this thread. That should show you who you're dealing with.

I'm going to put him on ignore.

I made the mistake of replying to a couple of his posts and now I'm regretting it.

[bobabode]

It's been a while since we've had avowed follower of Ayn Rand's noxious scribblings drop in to straighten us out. :rolleyes:

“There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old’s life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs." John Rogers

[donquixote99]

The point is that many Democrats in Congress voted in favor of the Iraq war, including Hillary.

What do Republican feels on Glass_Steagall have to do with the fact that it was Bill Clinton who repealed it?

I've been called a racist, xeonophobe sexist etc etc so many times that it's an instinctual reaction. If you want context search for the Greenwald video on youtube yourself.

I try not to put too much stock in my own instincts, so I certainly see no reason to care about yours.

[donquixote99]

.... but it's the truth.

Thank-you for your opinion.

[CarlV]

I will, as soon as you correct those people about it being all W's fault.

You seem to have skipped post 164.
http://www.politicalchat.org/showpost.php?p=302077&postcount=164

It happened on Bush's watch, so he is #2 at fault.


Just like filling 5000 US bodybags avenging 2700 deaths on 911 after he ignored and dismissed every warning sign.
http://citizenbrand.typepad.com/.a/6a00d8341c728253ef0120a772f33a970b-pi

Ignored Katrina until he couldn't.
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2006/08/28/us/28bush.xlarge1.jpg


Ignored his Texas crony friends, Enron, bankrupting California, just sat there and let them do it.

And all you can do is deflect and deny.

Carl

[CarlV]

So how many US citizens died when President Obama actually did take out Bin Laden? Something Bush couldn't do no matter how much blood flowed. You know the guy, Reagan paid him to fight the Russians in Afghanistan when he was president.

Carl

[bobabode]

Good ol' Gee Dubya, the fake smirking Texan from Kennebunkport...

http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/news/a42186/jeb-george-bush-south-carolina/

[bobabode]

I told you he was too much of a Wuss.

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/02/15/466849025/white-house-seems-to-rule-out-recess-appointment-to-replace-scalia

Heh, looks like the Prez has developed a taste for blood since he has no more fcks to give. This is a fight the nutjob brigade led by McConnell and all the charlatans seeking the top job are going to lose.

This is going to be a millstone hanging around every Republican senator's neck up for re-election in '16 races. Once again, Obama is playing three dimensional chess and the Repubs are still playing checkers.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/battle-over-scalias-replacement-already-spilling-into-senate-races/2016/02/15/a36c9972-d414-11e5-be55-2cc3c1e4b76b_story.html?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_courtobama-925pm%3Ahomepage%2Fstory

[Boreas]

I've been called a racist, xeonophobe sexist etc etc so many times.............

For the life of me I can't figure out why!

[noonereal]

For the life of me I can't figure out why!


You know John, it might be because he is. :)

[MrPots]

So predictable...

On cue...3...2...1....

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/donald-trump-considers-theory-scalia-might-have-been-murdered/

Donald Trump considers theory Scalia might have been murdered........

[donquixote99]

Is there something wrong with hating evil?

I think so. It closes your mind up tight, and makes you want to kill the object, even though there's always a chance you're wrong about the evil part. Basically, it makes you stupid, and it may well make you evil too.

[Tom Joad]

So predictable...

On cue...3...2...1....

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/donald-trump-considers-theory-scalia-might-have-been-murdered/

Donald Trump considers theory Scalia might have been murdered........

The judge, Cinderela Guevara

Cinderella Guevara?

[bobabode]

Cinderella Guevara?

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/58/CheHigh.jpg/450px-CheHigh.jpg

[Tom Joad]

Nice combination.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/58/CheHigh.jpg/450px-CheHigh.jpg


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=83BnDy1Ylog

[Pio1980]

So predictable...

On cue...3...2...1....

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/donald-trump-considers-theory-scalia-might-have-been-murdered/

Donald Trump considers theory Scalia might have been murdered........

Was Dick Cheney there?

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

[icenine]

Trump is a good carnival barker but a joke when it comes to critical thinking. He probably believes it.

[Zeke]

I've tried to not say anything because -- even if I disagree -- it is not easy for me to dismiss anyone who has so dedicated their life to service.

But, God, I disagreed...

I hope Democrats get three judges in five years.

[Pio1980]

I've tried to not say anything because -- even if I disagree -- it is not easy for me to dismiss anyone who has so dedicated their life to service.

But, God, I disagreed...

I hope Democrats get three judges in five years.

Your thought to God's ears.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

[JJIII]

So predictable...

On cue...3...2...1....

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/donald-trump-considers-theory-scalia-might-have-been-murdered/

Donald Trump considers theory Scalia might have been murdered........

I got curious and Googled "Texas law unattended death" and these came up.

http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/CR/htm/CR.49.htm

See ART. 49.04 # (6).

http://www.epcounty.com/medicalexaminer/faqs.htm

"Why is the office of the Medical Examiner (ME) involved?
The Office of the Medical Examiner is governed by a specific set of laws called the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, specifically Article 49.25 Medical Examiners are given also give all the rights and powers of a Justice of the Peace and those laws and duties apply as well. The following cases must be reported to our office:

- Deaths within 24 hours of admission to a hospital, nursing home or institution
- Unattended deaths (including at home)
- When a person is killed
- When a person is found and the circumstances of death are unknown
- When it is believed that the death of the individual came about by unlawful means
- When the death suspected to be a suicide "

IMO, not doing an autopsy is just going to "stir the puddin'."


.

[Coolidge23]

I've tried to not say anything because -- even if I disagree -- it is not easy for me to dismiss anyone who has so dedicated their life to service.

But, God, I disagreed...

I hope Democrats get three judges in five years.

Hopefully soon after Trump is elected that commie Ginsberg either buys the farm or decides to retire. Either way she needs to go.

Breyer is getting up there too. He also needs to go. Maybe the Donald will get to replace both of them.

[68custom]

dude you are on the wrong side of the fence, we want a moderate/liberal SCOTUS. more Ginsberg, less Thomas! :)
BTW just say no to D-bag don!

[Pio1980]

The Cosby affair has affected my view of Thomas v Hill. I can't figure out why Thomas would risk his rep, nor can I figure out why Anita Hill would put herself into a difficult position with her accusation knowing what it would bring.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

[Boreas]

The Cosby affair has affected my view of Thomas v Hill. I can't figure out why Thomas would risk his rep, nor can I figure out why Anita Hill would put herself into a difficult position with her accusation knowing what it would bring.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

Both are hard to fathom but sexual compulsions, especially of a deviant nature, are incredibly strong. Just consider Anthony Weiner and Eliot Spitzer. I find it much easier to believe that Thomas would disregard the risks to his career, such as it was at the time, to yield to his sexual impulses than to believe that, after long consideration, Anita Hill would come forward at the risk of her own future. The one act is insane and the other is courageous.

Anita Hill for SCOTUS!;)

[Boreas]

This may be about to get very, very juicy!

"I did not pay for the Justice's trip to Cibolo Creek Ranch," Poindexter told the Post. "He was an invited guest, along with a friend, just like 35 others."

The ranch owner did not give the identity of Scalia's friend to the Post.

Poindexter also told the newspaper, "The Justice was treated no differently by me, as no one was charged for activities, room and board, beverages, etc. That is a 22-year policy.''

It's not clear what relationship Scalia and Poindexter shared or who else was at the ranch, but the Post reported that in 2015 the Supreme Court declined to hear a case about an age discrimination lawsuit against a subsidiary Poindexter's Houston-based manufacturing firm J.B. Poindexter & Co.

http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/us-world/article/Report-Supreme-Court-Justice-Antonin-Scalia-6836532.php

[Tom Joad]

This may be about to get very, very juicy!



http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/us-world/article/Report-Supreme-Court-Justice-Antonin-Scalia-6836532.php

"He was an invited guest, along with a friend, just like 35 others."

The ranch owner did not give the identity of Scalia's friend to the Post.

A "friend"?

Maybe the old boy died in the saddle?

[Zeke]

A "friend"?

Maybe the old boy died in the saddle?

Oh PLEASE let his "friend" be male. :D

[Boreas]

I was really sorta hoping for auto-erotic asphyxiation.

And that could explain the "no autopsy" decision.

[Pio1980]

I was really sorta hoping for auto-erotic asphyxiation.

And that could explain the "no autopsy" decision.

Now, there's a conspiracy theory with wheels.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

[Rajoo]

Now, there's a conspiracy theory with wheels.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

Bingo and wouldn't that be fun. :D

[finnbow]

Apparently, Obama is considering a recess appointment, but he'll need to act by Sunday.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/white-house-officials-obama-could-use-recess-appointment-to-fill-scalia-seat/2016/02/17/75b0d1be-d5b9-11e5-be55-2cc3c1e4b76b_story.html

I'd love to see him do it and watch wingnut heads explode across the land.

[icenine]

Apparently, Obama is considering a recess appointment, but he'll need to act by Sunday.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/white-house-officials-obama-could-use-recess-appointment-to-fill-scalia-seat/2016/02/17/75b0d1be-d5b9-11e5-be55-2cc3c1e4b76b_story.html

I'd love to see him do it and watch wingnut heads explode across the land.

I think this stuff about some GOP Senators being willing to be open for hearings is a plot just to make the President wait until after Monday. I would do it and pray a Democratic Senate or Dem President takes over after January.

Am I insane but I was thinking Lindsey Graham might not be a bad choice...
at least he could not invade Iraq from the bench;). I bet this GOP Senate might even throw roadblocks at him.

[Tom Joad]

Am I insane but I was thinking Lindsey Graham might not be a bad choice...

Yes, you are insane.

The right wing extremists have owned the Supreme court by a 5-4 margin for three decades now. We need to turn that around, not perpetuate it.

[icenine]

Yes, you are insane.

The right wing extremists have owned the Supreme court by a 5-4 margin for three decades now. We need to turn that around, not perpetuate it.

Well he voted for the immigration reform bill, and was for taking down the Confederate flag.
He does not love Trump like you do. He has worked with Democrats before.

[finnbow]

Oh PLEASE let his "friend" be male. :D

Caitlyn Jenner, perhaps?

[CarlV]

The poll found 47 percent of those polled would like President Barack Obama to appoint the new justice before the election in November, while 46 percent would prefer the new justice be appointed by the next president. Pollsters also found 82 percent of Republicans would like the next president to appoint the replacement, while 77 percent of Democrats want Obama to make the appointment.
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2016/02/18/Poll-Americans-closely-divided-on-who-should-pick-new-justice/7691455805662/
47% of those polled have a clue of the Constitution,
46% watch Fox News. :rolleyes:


Carl

[CarlV]

Caitlyn Jenner, perhaps?

LOL!


Carl

[68custom]

Caitlyn Jenner, perhaps?

Definitely not she a righty, so was Brucey!:-)

[icenine]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/gop-supreme-court_us_56c5df81e4b08ffac127ccab

[Boreas]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/gop-supreme-court_us_56c5df81e4b08ffac127ccab

That's a serous mistake.

[Zeke]

That's a serous mistake.

Yeah.

I'm not a fan of this play.

[Tom Joad]

That's a serous mistake.

Maybe. But it's true.

Racism is a significant factor in motivating the Republican Obstructionism of Obama.

The fact that white people don't want to hear it doesn't make it any less true.

[Rajoo]

For all we know, this is simply politicking considering the fact that Hillary spoke about this in coded language and then the Black Caucus chimes in. With SC primary coming up next week, may also be an attempt to mobilize the black voters.

[Tom Joad]

For all we know, this is simply politicking considering the fact that Hillary spoke about this in coded language and then the Black Caucus chimes in. With SC primary coming up next week, may also be an attempt to mobilize the black voters.

I know.

It's really starting to piss me off the way all the blacks down here in Dixieland are rallying around the Hildebeast. It's about to make a racist out of me. :(

http://i843.photobucket.com/albums/zz359/Dog_of_the_Earth/Almighty_Moses_it_s_Miss_Scarlett.jpg (http://s843.photobucket.com/user/Dog_of_the_Earth/media/Almighty_Moses_it_s_Miss_Scarlett.jpg.html)

"Doan worry Mizz Hillary, we'll stop dem Bernie Bros"

[finnbow]

WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)—Conspiracy theorists believe that the Republican Party did not die from natural causes but was instead the target of an elaborately planned killing, a leading conspiracy theorist has confirmed.

Harland Dorrinson, whose basement walls are covered with photos of suspects in the killing of the G.O.P., has spent countless hours connecting those photos with different colors of yarn in the hopes that a larger pattern would emerge.

“Because the Republican Party is one hundred and sixty-one years old, it’s assumed that it was time for it to die,” he said. “The truth is, that’s exactly what the people who killed it want us to think.”

While some conspiracy theorists have focussed on the billionaire Donald J. Trump as the most likely suspect in the death of the Republican Party, Dorrinson favors a “two-killer” theory that involves Arizona Senator John McCain and former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin.

“McCain tapped Palin to be his running mate, and that led directly to people like Michele Bachmann, Herman Cain, and Donald Trump being considered credible candidates,” he said. “There is no logical reason why McCain would have chosen Palin unless he wanted to kill the Republican Party.”

In addition to the McCain-Palin cabal, Dorrinson is considering a host of other suspects, including the industrialists David and Charles Koch, the Fox News chairman Roger Ailes, and the novelist Ayn Rand.

“The only suspect I have definitively ruled out is Mitch McConnell,” he said. “No matter how hard I tried, I couldn’t imagine a scenario where he accomplished something.”

[bobabode]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/gop-supreme-court_us_56c5df81e4b08ffac127ccab

OLIGARCHS! Fire up the bus! :rolleyes:

[CarlV]

LOL, where's one of them dancing bananas gizmos when you need one? :p


Carl

[68custom]

You know I feel a little bad for bad mouthing the guy on the first page of this thread. seems like he was generally liked and an OK guy?
But how could he have voted like he did in respect to the Citizen United case?
I mean did he really think that a donation to a super pac is the same as a donation to say the GOP? really?

[bobabode]

Check out this McConnell & Grassley op-ed at the Post.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/mcconnell-and-grassley-democrats-shouldnt-rob-voters-of-chance-to-replace-scalia/2016/02/18/e5ae9bdc-d68a-11e5-be55-2cc3c1e4b76b_story.html?hpid=hp_no-name_opinion-card-a%3Ahomepage%2Fstory

[CarlV]

You know I feel a little bad for bad mouthing the guy on the first page of this thread. seems like he was generally liked and an OK guy?
But how could he have voted like he did in respect to the Citizen United case?
I mean did he really think that a donation to a super pac is the same as a donation to say the GOP? really?

He, Justice Oreo, and Cruze never miss a Koch Bros summit. Koch Bros pushed for C.U. Cha-Ching

OK, that all I got offhand.


Carl

[bobabode]

You know I feel a little bad for bad mouthing the guy on the first page of this thread. seems like he was generally liked and an OK guy?
But how could he have voted like he did in respect to the Citizen United case?
I mean did he really think that a donation to a super pac is the same as a donation to say the GOP? really?

Don't feel bad, I answered a call from the wife with that same song. ;)

Scalia has done great damage to our democratic form of government via Citizen's United and McCutcheon v. FEC, plus his vote gutting the VRA was another terribly naked partisan decision. His latest musings and mutterings about African Americans in the Texas University affirmative action case now before the court proves him to have been a racist in my opinion.

[d-ray657]

Check out this McConnell & Grassley op-ed at the Post.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/mcconnell-and-grassley-democrats-shouldnt-rob-voters-of-chance-to-replace-scalia/2016/02/18/e5ae9bdc-d68a-11e5-be55-2cc3c1e4b76b_story.html?hpid=hp_no-name_opinion-card-a%3Ahomepage%2Fstory

All I could read without paying was the headline, but the headline is a gross misrepresentation of the provisions in the Constitution. The headline that the Democrats should not deprive the citizens of the chance to replace Scalia distorts the constitutional process. The voters elect a president once every four years. The Constitution gives the president the authority to appoint candidate to fill judicial vacancies, with the advice and consent of the senate. Nowhere does the Constitution provide for popular election of federal judges. To the contrary, the system was designed to insulate the judiciary from politics and allow it to decide cases on the merits rather than political expediency. That is not to say that the system has worked perfectly. But it is apparent from the Constitution that direct democracy has no part in the selection of judges.

Regards,

D-Ray

[Tom Joad]

You know I feel a little bad for bad mouthing the guy on the first page of this thread.

That wasn't bad mouthing.

This was bad mouthing.

http://politicalchat.org/showpost.php?p=301647&postcount=4

And I feel just fine about it.

[bobabode]

All I could read without paying was the headline, but the headline is a gross misrepresentation of the provisions in the Constitution. The headline that the Democrats should not deprive the citizens of the chance to replace Scalia distorts the constitutional process. The voters elect a president once every four years. The Constitution gives the president the authority to appoint candidate to fill judicial vacancies, with the advice and consent of the senate. Nowhere does the Constitution provide for popular election of federal judges. To the contrary, the system was designed to insulate the judiciary from politics and allow it to decide cases on the merits rather than political expediency. That is not to say that the system has worked perfectly. But it is apparent from the Constitution that direct democracy has no part in the selection of judges.

Regards,

D-Ray

This link from Google may get you past the paywall.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwimxbjV8YTLAhUE62MKHSB4BSYQqQIIHTAA&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtonpost.com%2Fopinion s%2Fmcconnell-and-grassley-democrats-shouldnt-rob-voters-of-chance-to-replace-scalia%2F2016%2F02%2F18%2Fe5ae9bdc-d68a-11e5-be55-2cc3c1e4b76b_story.html&usg=AFQjCNFN7UH4tw6RESWfg8JTlbAxqWeJOw

[d-ray657]

This link from Google may get you past the paywall.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwimxbjV8YTLAhUE62MKHSB4BSYQqQIIHTAA&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtonpost.com%2Fopinion s%2Fmcconnell-and-grassley-democrats-shouldnt-rob-voters-of-chance-to-replace-scalia%2F2016%2F02%2F18%2Fe5ae9bdc-d68a-11e5-be55-2cc3c1e4b76b_story.html&usg=AFQjCNFN7UH4tw6RESWfg8JTlbAxqWeJOw

Nope, they still want my money. I might have to pony up later. Right now, it is just as well. I have better things to do than subject myself to the indigestion coming from reading his prevarications.

Regards,

D-Ray

[CarlV]

No last paragraph, not necessarily needed......




Appointed by President Ronald Reagan and unanimously confirmed by the Senate in 1986, Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia was a towering figure whose sharp wit and formidable intellect were rivaled only by a decades-long fidelity to our founding document and an enduring commitment to the rule of law. His death stands as a tragic loss for our country. Finding the right person to take the seat he occupied will clearly be a monumental task.

It may be a consequential challenge, but we think it’s one the American people are more than equipped to tackle.

Rarely does a Supreme Court vacancy occur in the final year of a presidential term, and the Senate has not confirmed a nominee to fill a vacancy arising in such circumstances for the better part of a century. So the American people have a particular opportunity now to make their voice heard in the selection of Scalia’s successor as they participate in the process to select their next president — as they decide who they trust to both lead the country and nominate the next Supreme Court justice. How often does someone from Ashland, Ky., or Zearing, Iowa, get to have such impact?

We don’t think the American people should be robbed of this unique opportunity. Democrats beg to differ. They’d rather the Senate simply push through yet another lifetime appointment by a president on his way out the door. No one disputes the president’s authority to nominate a successor to Scalia, but as inconvenient as it may be for this president, Article II, Section 2, of the Constitution grants the Senate the power to provide, or as the case may be, withhold its consent.


It was interesting to see Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) write in The Post just a few days ago that “the Senate’s constitutional duty to give a fair and timely hearing and a floor vote to the president’s Supreme Court nominees has remained inviolable.”

But that’s not what he said on the Senate floor about judicial nominees when a Republican was in the White House.

“The duties of the United States Senate are set forth in the Constitution of the United States. Nowhere in that document does it say the Senate has a duty to give presidential nominees a vote. It says appointments shall be made with the advice and consent of the Senate. That’s very different than saying every nominee receives a vote.”

“The Senate,” he said then, “is not a rubber stamp for the executive branch.”

Indeed, this is the kind of logic that led more than two dozen Democratic senators — including Sens. Reid, Charles E. Schumer (N.Y.), Patrick J. Leahy (Vt.) and then-senators Barack Obama (Ill.), Joe Biden (Del.), John F. Kerry (Mass.) and Hillary Clinton (N.Y.) — to vote to deny President George W. Bush’s nominee to the Supreme Court, Samuel Alito, an up-or-down vote.

That was when then-senator Obama seemed to have a very different, and very robust, appreciation for the Senate’s constitutional authority.

That was when Schumer, today the heir apparent as Senate Democratic leader, gave a lengthy and stirring speech to the left-leaning American Constitution Society — 18 months, or 1½ years, before the end of Bush’s term — in which he declared that the Senate “should reverse the presumption of confirmation” and “not confirm a Supreme Court nominee except in extraordinary circumstances.”

Even if some Democrats may be having amnesiac experiences today, it’s clear that concern over confirming Supreme Court nominations made near the end of a presidential term is not new.

We also know that Americans issued a stinging rebuke to this president and his policies in our latest national election, delivering a landslide for the opposition party as they handed control of the Senate to Republicans in 2014.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/mcconnell-and-grassley-democrats-shouldnt-rob-voters-of-chance-to-replace-scalia/2016/02/18/e5ae9bdc-d68a-11e5-be55-2cc3c1e4b76b_story.html

[donquixote99]

Let me boil it down. 'We loved Scalia, we're entitled to another for 'his spot.' and Obama SHOULD NOT try to deprive us. Who does he think HE is?'

[68custom]

Obama absolutely should appoint a new judge!

[Rajoo]

Let me boil it down. 'We loved Scalia, we're entitled to another for 'his spot.' and Obama SHOULD NOT try to deprive us. Who does he think HE is?'

The code word used is Scalia's replacement, not Supreme Court nominee. I have seen this reference elsewhere.

[finnbow]

It seems Scalia and several others were fond of quoting Dylan in their opinions.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/23/us/politics/how-does-it-feel-chief-justice-roberts-to-hone-a-dylan-quote.html

[CarlV]

Let me boil it down. 'We loved Scalia, we're entitled to another for 'his spot.' and Obama SHOULD NOT try to deprive us. Who does he think HE is?'

Yep and never mind McConnell's selective amnesia regarding the Justice Kennedy appointment.


On Feb. 3, 1988, McConnell and literally every other GOP senator voted to confirm Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy. This was during President Ronald Reagan's last year in the White House, and at a time when Democrats controlled the Senate. Kennedy was confirmed 97-0, with three Democrats -- Joe Biden, Al Gore and Paul Simon -- not voting at all because, presumably, they were busy running for president that year.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/mitch-mcconnell-supreme-court-antonin-scalia_us_56bfcde2e4b08ffac1259285
:rolleyes:


Carl

[CarlV]

It seems Scalia and several others were fond of quoting Dylan in their opinions.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/23/us/politics/how-does-it-feel-chief-justice-roberts-to-hone-a-dylan-quote.html

Dylan not flattered would be an understatement I'm sure.:)


Carl

[CarlV]

No more lies, just a F*** You.

The Republican-led Senate on Tuesday ruled out taking action on any nominee put forth by President Barack Obama to the Supreme Court in a political power move intended to thwart his ability to change the court's ideological balance.

Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said the Senate will not hold hearings or vote on any nominee to replace long-serving conservative Justice Antonin Scalia until after the next president takes office next January. Scalia died on Feb. 13.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-court-mcconnell-idUSKCN0VW1SO


Carl

[donquixote99]

We TRIED to tell Obama to do the recess appointment.....

[bobabode]

No more lies, just a F*** You.


Carl

I hope this will fire up Democrats to show up in November.

[Boreas]

I hope this will fire up Democrats to show up in November.

More than that, I hope it shows the last few remaining sane Republicans where their party has gone.

[bobabode]

More than that, I hope it shows the last few remaining sane Republicans where their party has gone.

Agreed. This is naked partisanship of the worst sort. They've been nattering on about a speech Joe Biden made years ago. Of course, they're parsing what he said to their benefit.

[Boreas]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tyxth1YPJGk

[bobabode]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tyxth1YPJGk

This is thoroughly despicable and frankly traitorous behavior from Senator Grassley. If for nothing else, these polecats on the judiciary committee should be tarred, feathered and rode out of town on a rail for this naked attempt at nullification. :mad:

[Rajoo]

Charles Grassley Faces Formidable Challenger in Iowa Senate Race

On the Senate floor, several Democrats berated Mr. Grassley for a full hour as Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the minority leader, has done for much of the last two weeks. “This is obstruction and chaos,” Mr. Reid said.

The criticism became so intense that the usually restrained Mr. Grassley took the highly unusual step of taking over as the presiding officer of the Senate to cut off the Democrats.

“Give me a break,” Mr. Grassley said later. “We made a decision based on history and our intention to protect the ability of the American people to make their voices heard.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/04/us/politics/charles-grassley-patty-judge-iowa-senate-race.html?_r=0

[bobabode]

Charles Grassley Faces Formidable Challenger in Iowa Senate Race



http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/04/us/politics/charles-grassley-patty-judge-iowa-senate-race.html?_r=0

Good news that Grassley will be facing a strong Democratic party challenger.
He needs to go back to Iowa and raise chickens.