Senior U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice Antonin Scalia found dead at West Texas r

Jarod said:
You think the Supreme Court should be left with a vacancy for over a year, just to serve your political agenda?
Click to expand...

Listening to the lunacy the supposed "constitutionalists" spout to justify stonewalling Obama for the next year is sweet music to my ears.

Their hypocritical duplicity is truly a joy to behold!!

I think I'll just kick back and drink it all in for a bit...ROFL!!
 
ZappasGuitar said:
Listening to the lunacy the supposed "constitutionalists" spout to justify stonewalling Obama for the next year is sweet music to my ears.

Their hypocritical duplicity is truly a joy to behold!!

I think I'll just kick back and drink it all in for a bit...ROFL!!
Click to expand...

Your words are not petty personal attacks or derision?

Please explain.
 
Jarod said:
You think they should subvert the will of the people and the last presidential election and give the president only a three-year term?
Click to expand...

Consent is a prerogative of the Senate. That's inane. It's not Advice "OR" Consent, it is "AND"... If they do not consent the nominee is not on the court, that's the way it works.
 
Democrats should play the Republicans game, if a Republican wins, filibuster nominee until the next election in four years. The Republicans love to part dirty, the Democrats should stop being such goody two shoes.
 
Arq Fgnex'f Urnq said:
Democrats should play the Republicans game, if a Republican wins, filibuster nominee until the next election in four years. The Republicans love to part dirty, the Democrats should stop being such goody two shoes.
Click to expand...

The Democrats already got rid of the 60 vote filibuster rules on certain nominees. Not a problem any longer, the republicans can just use that same precedent already set by those "goody two shoes" Democrats.
 
Arq Fgnex'f Urnq said:
Democrats should play the Republicans game, if a Republican wins, filibuster nominee until the next election in four years. The Republicans love to part dirty, the Democrats should stop being such goody two shoes.
Click to expand...

Well, why not? The GOP would set a crazy precedent by putting it off almost a full year. What difference would it make to extend that?
 
Jarod said:
One of the duties of the elected president is to appoint Supreme Court justices. The reason the Republicans might delay acting on any of President Obama's appointment would be to try and delay it until a new president is elected. In fact this is subverting the last presidential election and disregarding the the will of the people in that election.
Click to expand...

Are you saying that just because the President appoints someone, that they should just automatically be approved??

As to your other post, in which you made an abrupt left turn; thanks for showing why your APP comments were rejected and deleted. :good4u:
 
Shit's going to hit the fan now. This could be a game changer in how our government operates. No way does his replacement get nominated. A qualified individual should be nominated and confirmed but I doubt like hell it happens. There's a good chance Dems could come out of this with the White House, SCOTUS and the Senate.

Oddly enough this could sink both Bernie, Trump and Cruz. I don't think either party or more correctly, their constituents, are going to support them with a SCOTUS Justice seat at stake.
 
Arq Fgnex'f Urnq said:
Democrats should play the Republicans game, if a Republican wins, filibuster nominee until the next election in four years. The Republicans love to part dirty, the Democrats should stop being such goody two shoes.
Click to expand...

democrats are pussies and don't have the heart for something like that
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Shit's going to hit the fan now. This could be a game changer in how our government operates. No way does his replacement get nominated. A qualified individual should be nominated and confirmed but I doubt like hell it happens. There's a good chance Dems could come out of this with the White House, SCOTUS and the Senate.

Oddly enough this could sink both Bernie, Trump and Cruz. I don't think either party or more correctly, their constituents, are going to support them with a SCOTUS Justice seat at stake.
Click to expand...

i def thinks this hurts bernie big time. The idealists in the party are about to grow up. Don't think it hurts cruz or trump very much. In fact I think it helps both of them.
 
Arq Fgnex'f Urnq said:
Democrats should play the Republicans game, if a Republican wins, filibuster nominee until the next election in four years. The Republicans love to part dirty, the Democrats should stop being such goody two shoes.
Click to expand...

The Democrats are a bunch of pussies. Let them play games.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Shit's going to hit the fan now. This could be a game changer in how our government operates. No way does his replacement get nominated. A qualified individual should be nominated and confirmed but I doubt like hell it happens. There's a good chance Dems could come out of this with the White House, SCOTUS and the Senate.

Oddly enough this could sink both Bernie, Trump and Cruz. I don't think either party or more correctly, their constituents, are going to support them with a SCOTUS Justice seat at stake.
Click to expand...

How does one control the SCOTUS? I thought it was supposed to be based on the Constitution not personal ideology. And Liberals claim they don't want activist judges.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top