Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia Dies

[deep]

I hear Marfa's actually a cool town.

Why am I not surprised

(at a sex farm)

 

[corianderstem]

 

[Oregoropa]

'No Country for Old Men' and 'There Will Be Blood' were the two front-runners in the Oscar race were both filming in Marfa at the same time. Smoke from the 'Blood' set delayed filming for 'Old Men' a couple hours. 'No Country for Old Men' would go on to win best picture.

DDL would go to the Sex Farm in character.

 

[Oregoropa]

Sure, I think if the situation were reversed and a Republican president were up against a heavily Democratic Senate, the Democrats would do their part to disagree with the Republican president's pick.

You are correct. Chuck Schumer did the exact same thing in 2007 ( more than a year before Bush left office )

 

[BVS]

You are correct. Chuck Schumer did the exact same thing in 2007 ( more than a year before Bush left office )

The EXACT same thing? Did you not listen to the video you posted?


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

 

[Oregoropa]

The EXACT same thing? Did you not listen to the video you posted?

It is true there is only one Chuck Schumer so he's not going to be verbatim to what McConnell says now. You're just picking gnat shit out of pepper, to argue for a purist comparison of Senate blocking language. The one major difference is Schumer was making these statements with 18 months to go before January 2009 as opposed to 11 months till January 2017.

Bob Dole once quipped that "the most dangerous place in Washington is between Charles Schumer and a television camera"

 

[Irvine511]

I certainly do hope the GOP throws a 10-month tantrum. All the better for turnout.

 

[Oregoropa]

I certainly do hope the GOP throws a 10-month tantrum. All the better for turnout.

The energy is on the GOP side and with the BernieBros. The tantrum could cut the other way.

 

[BVS]

It is true there is only one Chuck Schumer so he's not going to be verbatim to what McConnell says now. You're just picking gnat shit out of pepper, to argue for a purist comparison of Senate blocking language. The one major difference is Schumer was making these statements with 18 months to go before January 2009 as opposed to 11 months till January 2017.



Bob Dole once quipped that "the most dangerous place in Washington is between Charles Schumer and a television camera"

No, the big difference that escaped you was that he said they would block unless they were shown it was a choice that matched with the mainstream. It wasn't just some blanket blocking "because Bush". He also went on to explain how recent appointments were lied about to get extremists in. The difference in his speech vs the current clown car is reasoning vs pure agenda. Can you really not see that?


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

 

[Oregoropa]

No, the big difference that escaped you was that he said they would block unless they were shown it was a choice that matched with the mainstream. It wasn't just some blanket blocking "because Bush". He also went on to explain how recent appointments were lied about to get extremists in. The difference in his speech vs the current clown car is reasoning vs pure agenda. Can you really not see that?

What I see is we have a differing view on what constitutes mainstream vs extremist. Do you consider Chief Justice Roberts extremist ?

 

[Irvine511]

The energy is on the GOP side and with the BernieBros. The tantrum could cut the other way.

Go ahead. This is how the Dems will flip the Senate.

 

[BVS]

What I see is we have a differing view on what constitutes mainstream vs extremist. Do you consider Chief Justice Roberts extremist ?

:facepalm:You're still missing the point. No, I wouldn't consider Roberts an extremist, Scalia? Absolutely. Has anyone on the Republican side said they would vote yes in certain circumstances? Has anyone given reason beyond "because Obama"?

Once again Reasoning vs Agenda. It's not about gnat shit, if you can't see the difference than I'm truly sorry.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

 

[LuckyNumber7]

It's really sad how partisanship isn't a thing at all anymore. You get roasted for not making the vote your party makes.

 

[anitram]

What I see is we have a differing view on what constitutes mainstream vs extremist. Do you consider Chief Justice Roberts extremist ?

I'd encourage you to listen again because you are misinterpreting the intent.

Schumer said there should be no confirmation in extreme circumstances.

McConnell is saying they will BLOCK any nomination so that the Senate won't even be able to get to the point of confirmation.

How do you not see a vast difference?

 

[gump]

Mitch McConnell, 1970-71, Kentucky Law Journal:

“At the outset, the Senate should discount the philosophy of the nominee. In our politically centrist society, it is highly unlikely that any Executive would nominate a man of such extreme views of the right of the left as to be disturbing to the Senate. However, a nomination, for example, of a Communist or a member of the American Nazi Parly, would have to be considered an exception to the recommendation that the Senate leave ideological considerations to the discretion of the Executive. Political and philosophical considerations were often a factor in the nineteenth century and arguably in the Parker, Haynsworth and Carswell cases also, but this is not proper and tends to degrade the Court and dilute the constitutionally proper authority of the Executive in this area. The President is presumably elected by the people to carry out a program and altering the ideological directions of the Supreme Court would seem to be a perfectly legitimate part of a Presidential platform. To that end, the Constitution gives to him the power to nominate. As mentioned earlier, if the power to nominate had been given to the Senate, as was considered during the debates at the Constitutional Convention, then it would be proper for the Senate to consider political philosophy. The proper role of the Senate is to advise and consent to the particular nomination, and thus, as the Constitution puts it, “to appoint.” This taken within the context of modern times should mean an examination only into the qualifications of the President’s nominee.”

 

[Mack_Again]

you guys' reasoning is pure applesauce

 

[dazzledbylight]

interesting juxtaposition, isn't it?

i feel sad for someone's death but I feel ecstatic for the fact that one of my least favorite human being is no more.

I hear this. A friend said when told her... isn't that good for most people? I practically snorted ! But I feel bad for his family, close friends and after a few days later sad for him AND yet ..still he did a lot of damage to broad swarths of people in certain rulings...so...

yeah, can't hurt us anymore. Mixed feelings, yes.

 

[dazzledbylight]

Soo, basically a president that still has 1/4th of his term left is now useless and should not be making decisions his successor might not completely agree with while there is still one WHOLE YEAR left of decisionmaking and life going on as usual?

Wow, such logic.. wow.

According to some people, yeah.

 

[dazzledbylight]

From what I've heard, Cruz plans to filibuster Obama's nomination. Because of course he would .

Sure, I think if the situation were reversed and a Republican president were up against a heavily Democratic Senate, the Democrats would do their part to disagree with the Republican president's pick.

But I also think their motives for doing so would be very different from the current Republican party's motives for opposing Obama's pick. The GOP's refusal to support anything Obama has put forth during his time as president (including things the GOP themselves were originally for until Obama got on board) has much deeper, and often much uglier, reasons behind it.

Yup. There was a group of Republicans i think either the night before Obama's first Inauguraruon the right wing republicans met in a DC restaurant and basically said they'd stop everything Obama would try to do.

ML ,nice to see you here.

 

[dazzledbylight]

I certainly do hope the GOP throws a 10-month tantrum. All the better for turnout.

sounds good to me!

 

[dazzledbylight]

The energy is on the GOP side and with the BernieBros. The tantrum could cut the other way.

I hopeand pray that if Bernie gets the nomination ( I like him- I'm afraid tho, he'd be "McGoverned"
(McG was my first presidential vote @ 19 yrs) that his supporters will not sit the election out or write in another person, or vote for som thirrd party person.

There was a report issued in either Great Britain or England that over a 100 yes or so it showed that when conservatives were in office more people got suck, more people died. Surprise!!!

I like Hillary too even if she's sometimes tii Centerrist for me. And because I was listening to Public radio and some progressives repadio talkers I knew Obama wasn't going to be as liberal as some people thought

 

[dazzledbylight]

Sorry too iffy to do "multi-quote" on my tablet.

Sent from from my newest generation Kindle Fire on the MTA's free WIFI

 

[LuckyNumber7]

Sounds like ol' Barry just CTRL+F'd "pro-choice republicans" for the Scalia replacement, just to make every congressdouche look like an asshat. They'll have two options:

1) chew out their own kind and call them 'unqualified'

or

2) look like total dumbasses as they fail to hold their ever so firm stance that "the people" should get a say in the next election

 

[Irvine511]

i just love this. so smart in so many ways.

Obama Vets Republican Nevada Gov. Brian Sandoval for Supreme Court Seat - WSJ

 

[Oregoropa]

Sandoval is definitely a trial balloon to gauge GOP reaction. It is a smart play.

 

[Moonlit_Angel]

Yup. There was a group of Republicans i think either the night before Obama's first Inauguraruon the right wing republicans met in a DC restaurant and basically said they'd stop everything Obama would try to do.

Mmhm. Fortunately, that plan hasn't entirely worked out in their favor.

ML ,nice to see you here.

Hello.

As for this latest news with the Supreme Court justice...oooh. Well played, Obama. Well played.

 

[PhilsFan]

It'll be Merrick Garland.

 

[Irvine511]

i can't wait for the pouting to get started.

 

[Galeongirl]

So is that a good thing or a bad thing?

 

[LuckyNumber7]

A bad thing. It means unabated objection.