SCOTUS Nomination Thread

[Doc Savage Fan]

As satisfying as payback is, I think sinking to their level only further serves to perpetrate a race to the bottom and the continued breaking down of functional governing in this country. That plays the Republican's advantage right off the bat because they are the party in big government claiming that big government does not and cannot work. A self fulfilling prophecy.

And if Republicans stooped to the Democrat's level under Reid...Dems wouldn't be allowed to offer amendments to bills in the Senate.

 

[Sonikku]

Getting into a pissing contest doesn't help anybody. (save for interests best served by keeping the American majority distracted and placated) What we need to do is stop focusing so much on scoring some points for our team and start to fucking govern.

 

[buckshot24]

Getting into a pissing contest doesn't help anybody. (save for interests best served by keeping the American majority distracted and placated) What we need to do is stop focusing so much on scoring some points for our team and start to fucking govern.

If this posturing helps keep harmful bills from passing then I'm all for it. You act as if "getting something done" is better.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

Does anybody here think that the Repubs' will actually follow through on their threats?

(I think it's posturing in response to events in the Repub primary - people are mad as hell at them and they have 24 seats up for grabs.)

Fern

There has been enough lockstep obstruction since '09 that one might gamble on their following through.

All Obama has to do is pass business cards and resume's to the Senate. The ball is in their court, and we'll have to see what they do with it. If they refuse to play ball, they can roll the dice and take their chances in November.

I also heard today something I may have missed: that Dems had obstructed a Bush lame-duck appointment for howsoever long it was.

Add to that some quotes of Senator Schumer during the Bush presidency as to what they should or shouldn't do.

So this gets back to the veil of ignorance aspect. Be careful what you wish for now, because you may be on the other side of that wish later.

 

[buckshot24]

Is one 'obstructing' if they don't rubber stamp the president's agenda?

 

[lopri]

I do not think anyone here advocates rubber stamping anything.

 

[senseamp]

As satisfying as payback is, I think sinking to their level only further serves to perpetrate a race to the bottom and the continued breaking down of functional governing in this country. That plays the Republican's advantage right off the bat because they are the party in big government claiming that big government does not and cannot work. A self fulfilling prophecy.

Better than return to GOP SCOTUS. If GOP changes the rules, turn those rules on them, but twice as hard.

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

I also heard today something I may have missed: that Dems had obstructed a Bush lame-duck appointment for howsoever long it was.

lame duck
noun
noun: lame duck; plural noun: lame ducks; modifier noun: lame-duck

North American
an official (especially the president) in the final period of office, after the election of a successor.
"as a lame duck, the president had nothing to lose by approving the deal"

Add to that some quotes of Senator Schumer during the Bush presidency as to what they should or shouldn't do.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/lol-has-anyone-looked-at-what-schumer-actually-said

 

[BonzaiDuck]

If this posturing helps keep harmful bills from passing then I'm all for it. You act as if "getting something done" is better.

Well, "harmful" is in the eyes of the beholder, but let's say "harmful" is possible. Instead, they've allowed nothing or little.

There are some things I'D like to get done. For starters, I'd like to see a coordinated effort to reform and streamline the entire federal career service. I'd like to see the entirety of all enabling legislation reviewed without partisanship and re-cast to make the bureaucracy work better. Perhaps, tighten up the Hatch Act.

But that ain't gonna happen.

 

[pete6032]

Is one 'obstructing' if they don't rubber stamp the president's agenda?

No, but it is obstruction if a president nominates someone and the Senate refuses to bring it to a vote.

 

[glenn1]

No, but it is obstruction if a president nominates someone and the Senate refuses to bring it to a vote.

So basically obstruction is what the Democrats did to Dubya's nomination of Miguel Estrada to the Appellate Court. Because the left didn't want a qualified minority candidate to get a job.

 

[buckshot24]

Well, "harmful" is in the eyes of the beholder, but let's say "harmful" is possible. Instead, they've allowed nothing or little.

You don't think harmful is possible?

 

[Sonikku]

If this posturing helps keep harmful bills from passing then I'm all for it. You act as if "getting something done" is better.

I consider making progress to be better. If Obama were allowed to nominate a justice and the senate could let it come to a vote and vet them through hard questions before giving it a nay or yay, even that would be something. Even a no vote one time or two times or three times in a row in the search of another justice would be progress. Not just "getting something done".

Such as it is though they have basically said it isn't even going to get that far. They're unwilling to let a nominee so much as come to a vote before knocking it down, regardless of who he nominates. It's nothing more than simple political posturing for purely political gain. Scalia never had to put up with this shit.

 

[buckshot24]

I consider making progress to be better. If Obama were allowed to nominate a justice and the senate could let it come to a vote and vet them through hard questions before giving it a nay or yay, even that would be something. Even a no vote one time or two times or three times in a row in the search of another justice would be progress. Not just "getting something done".

Such as it is though they have basically said it isn't even going to get that far. They're unwilling to let a nominee so much as come to a vote before knocking it down, regardless of who he nominates. It's nothing more than simple political posturing for purely political gain. Scalia never had to put up with this shit.

Well, we all have our opinions. I consider it progress to stop, by any means necessary, the placement of a liberal hack into the supreme court and have to put up with them ignoring the constitution for 40 years.

 

[Jhhnn]

And if Republicans stooped to the Democrat's level under Reid...Dems wouldn't be allowed to offer amendments to bills in the Senate.

Obstruction takes many forms. Endless poison pill amendments that have no chance but take up time are just one way to accomplish it.

 

[Jhhnn]

Well, we all have our opinions. I consider it progress to stop, by any means necessary, the placement of a liberal hack into the supreme court and have to put up with them ignoring the constitution for 40 years.

It's remarkable that you can have such a strong opinion based on thin air.

Beginning with Nixon, 12 of the last 16 SCOTUS appointments have been made by Republican presidents. Carter got none, Clinton 2 & Obama 2 so far. If the Court has been ignoring the Constitution, it's been Repub appointees doing it.

It's the luck of the draw & Repubs have exploited it to the max. Now, when luck turns against them, they act like they're entitled to good luck all the time.

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

 

[buckshot24]

It's remarkable that you can have such a strong opinion based on thin air.

Beginning with Nixon, 12 of the last 16 SCOTUS appointments have been made by Republican presidents. Carter got none, Clinton 2 & Obama 2 so far. If the Court has been ignoring the Constitution, it's been Repub appointees doing it.

It's the luck of the draw & Repubs have exploited it to the max. Now, when luck turns against them, they act like they're entitled to good luck all the time.

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

I'm not a republican, a liberal justice is a liberal justice.

Clinton Appointees.

Breyer
Ginsburg

Obama Appointees.

Sotomayor
Kagen

All liberals.

The fact that republicans put some liberals in there really doesn't change my point.

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

I consider making progress to be better. If Obama were allowed to nominate a justice and the senate could let it come to a vote and vet them through hard questions before giving it a nay or yay, even that would be something. Even a no vote one time or two times or three times in a row in the search of another justice would be progress. Not just "getting something done".

Such as it is though they have basically said it isn't even going to get that far. They're unwilling to let a nominee so much as come to a vote before knocking it down, regardless of who he nominates. It's nothing more than simple political posturing for purely political gain. Scalia never had to put up with this shit.

It's a constitutional violation is what it is. This isn't obstructing any specific appointee, it's obstructing explicit power of the office of president. McConnell gave up any pretense otherwise, and shame on the media for hammering it into the same "politics as usual/both sides do it" narrative they do with everything, facts be damned.

 

[buckshot24]

It's a constitutional violation is what it is. This isn't obstructing any specific appointee, it's obstructing explicit power of the office of president. McConnell gave up any pretense otherwise, and shame on the media for hammering it into the same "politics as usual/both sides do it" narrative they do with everything, facts be damned.

The constitution is a living document mate.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

Well, we all have our opinions. I consider it progress to stop, by any means necessary, the placement of a liberal hack into the supreme court and have to put up with them ignoring the constitution for 40 years.

We all can make arguments in either direction. Our system is built on compromise & backroom deals like it or not. Nobody ever gets everything they want.
The right should get fired up for a moderate as possible replacement and field a Presidential candidate that has a chance of winning so that person can name Ginsbergs replacement.

 

[Jhhnn]

So basically obstruction is what the Democrats did to Dubya's nomination of Miguel Estrada to the Appellate Court. Because the left didn't want a qualified minority candidate to get a job.

More bullshit. Dems objected because Estrada was a trojan horse with a very thin resume & a convenient memory.

That's why Repubs fought about it for 28 months rather than offering up an alternative. It's not like they didn't have other capable & qualified candidates more acceptable to Dems.

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

 

[Jhhnn]

I'm not a republican, a liberal justice is a liberal justice.

Clinton Appointees.

Breyer
Ginsburg

Obama Appointees.

Sotomayor
Kagen

All liberals.

The fact that republicans put some liberals in there really doesn't change my point.

The fact that you define Honest Repubs as Liberal means you have no point. Repubs have stacked the Court for decades using extreme right ideologues whenever possible. They made a few mistakes in that.

Too bad. So sad. Their current whining & posturing shows just how entitled they've become about it.

 

[cyclohexane]

Lose lose for republicans:


If they delay the Obama nomination they risk nominations by president sanders, or president Clinton. And even republicans know that trump or Cruz nominating Supreme Court justices would be horrible and unpredictable for everyone.

So why make all the fuss then?

 

[ivwshane]

Lose lose for republicans:


If they delay the Obama nomination they risk nominations by president sanders, or president Clinton. And even republicans know that trump or Cruz nominating Supreme Court justices would be horrible and unpredictable for everyone.

So why make all the fuss then?

To find your answer you have to look no further than the idiots that support them. They obstruct and delay because their base demands it. They are required to do what their base wants because they rigged it to ensure only repubs get elected.


We won't have real reform unless we have unbiased and fair districts. Separating the red and the blue only ensures that compromise is a losing platform.

People think it's money in politics that's destroying our government but that's only a small part of it, gerrymandered districts is the biggest issue.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

You don't think harmful is possible?

Harmful was possible at Porter Ranch. If people work to make workable even those things they disagree with, you'd only know when it's genuinely harmful.

That doesn't mean one wants to obstruct everything.