Obama Now Has the Power to Appoint 93 Federal Judges

[TemplarKormac]

So, just because Obama doesn't get to appoint the judges he wants allows him and his party to justify throwing 225 years of legislative history in the trash? Oh well, this will bite them in the ass. Democrats in Washington are notorious for not thinking things through, i.e. Obamacare.

Actually, they know exactly what they are doing. Getting as much power as they can before they are kicked to the curb...........Which eventually they will be..............

This has happened before in our history. They were so hated at one point because of their policies that they started calling themselves Liberals instead of Progressives. Now they tend to call themselves Progressives as Liberal becomes the bad word. It just hasn't gotten to the point that the people realize the left's ultimate goals yet. The people in this country are not so well informed, and IGNORANCE IS BLISS TO THE STATIST MACHINE.

If Republicans have any decency next year, they will restore the filibuster and not exploit an advantage given to them foolishly by the other side. Play the bigger man here. I mean they'll be no better than the Democrats if they do such a thing. This can be easily undone in a heartbeat.

 

[eagle1462010]

So, just because Obama doesn't get to appoint the judges he wants allows him and his party to justify throwing 225 years of legislative history in the trash? Oh well, this will bite them in the ass. Democrats in Washington are notorious for not thinking things through, i.e. Obamacare.

Actually, they know exactly what they are doing. Getting as much power as they can before they are kicked to the curb...........Which eventually they will be..............

This has happened before in our history. They were so hated at one point because of their policies that they started calling themselves Liberals instead of Progressives. Now they tend to call themselves Progressives as Liberal becomes the bad word. It just hasn't gotten to the point that the people realize the left's ultimate goals yet. The people in this country are not so well informed, and IGNORANCE IS BLISS TO THE STATIST MACHINE.

If Republicans have any decency next year, they will restore the filibuster and not exploit an advantage given to them foolishly by the other side. Play the bigger man here. I mean they'll be no better than the Democrats if they do such a thing. This can be easily undone in a heartbeat.

There is no advantage next year as Obama will still be the POTUS, so of course they will reinstate it to attempt to stop Obama's radical left wing agenda...................

The question still remains on will the GOP take the Senate. It should be taken unless they just fuck it up, as many more Dem seats are up for grabs than Rep. Also, most of the States have firm Red State Legislatures....................

Hopefully making Obama a complete Lame Duck for the rest of his term, putting his sorry commie butt in time out for 2 years..............

 

[eagle1462010]

The GOP would need 2/3rd's of the Senate to Impeach Obama.............

Darn the bad luck there...................

His actions regarding the law are quite frankly Impeachable now, but it can never happen under the current situation and people serving................

 

[NYcarbineer]

Obama just committed an unprecedented tyranny.

This represents a ridiculous power grab from one of the most tyrannical administrations in US History.

Let me ask you a question:

If the party in power in both the presidency and the Senate should not have the right to appoint and approve judges,

who should?

Please be specific and explain your reasoning in detail.

Good question.

Why the blocks when it was Bush and the Republicans trying to fill seats?

That's irrelevant. The Republicans could have done what the Democrats did yesterday. The GOP chose to allow it then, that's on them.

Now back to the question. Did you have answer, in case your dodge got stuffed, as it just did?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Obama just committed an unprecedented tyranny.

This represents a ridiculous power grab from one of the most tyrannical administrations in US History.

Let me ask you a question:

If the party in power in both the presidency and the Senate should not have the right to appoint and approve judges,

who should?

Please be specific and explain your reasoning in detail.

Anyone else want to try the question above?

 

[jon_berzerk]

Next year when the GOP takes the senate they can do the same thing.

it is a sad thing when the minority is disregarded and tossed aside

in a deal like this many minority issues could be lost

 

[bripat9643]

Mitch could have let Obama have 3 judges, now he can have 93 with just Democratic votes .. dumb move. <my comment.

Daily Kos: Senate GOP blows itself up. What the hell were they thinking?

True, today's deal preserved the existing filibuster rule, but it really didn't. Democrats established that they could bust through any filibuster with a simple majority anytime they wanted. Sure, it's still a process to do so, full of blustery threats and hyperbolic doomsaying, but it's a process [...]
But if Republicans continue to prevent up-or-down votes on further administration officials, or perhaps more importantly, judicial ones, Democrats now have a tool to force action. And that means we've come a long way from a few years ago, when Senate Democrats simply shrugged at the inevitability of the GOP filibuster arguing they had no other option.

I must admit, I didn't expect Republicans to challenge this notion this quickly. And the reason is simple: Even with a truncated and compromised filibuster, Republicans were able to gum up the works to unprecedented levels. As Bill Sher at the Campaign for America's Future notes, the federal judiciary is now evenly balanced, with 390 GOP-appointed judges and 391 Democratic-appointed ones. However, there are 93 vacancies.
<more>

That's all this country needs to finish it off is 93 commie pinko judges in the mode of Van Jones.

 

[Stephanie]

Remember how the Democrats crow they look out for minorities more?

well that was another LIE

 

[rightwinger]

The President is appointing judges?

Since when has he had that power?

 

[rightwinger]

Next year when the GOP takes the senate they can do the same thing.

it is a sad thing when the minority is disregarded and tossed aside

in a deal like this many minority issues could be lost

WEell....when the minority acts like a bunch of assholes, that can happen

Republicans......ONCE AGAIN....overplayed a weak hand and lost

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Obama just committed an unprecedented tyranny.

This represents a ridiculous power grab from one of the most tyrannical administrations in US History.

Not even close.

You rw's are in favor of selling out our country to corporations and foreign interests. You kowtow to the Muslim who controls fox. Because of that, as well as gerrymandering and voter suppression, we will never again see an honest election.

This is nothing compared to that.

 

[Sallow]

Mitch could have let Obama have 3 judges, now he can have 93 with just Democratic votes .. dumb move. <my comment.

Daily Kos: Senate GOP blows itself up. What the hell were they thinking?

True, today's deal preserved the existing filibuster rule, but it really didn't. Democrats established that they could bust through any filibuster with a simple majority anytime they wanted. Sure, it's still a process to do so, full of blustery threats and hyperbolic doomsaying, but it's a process [...]
But if Republicans continue to prevent up-or-down votes on further administration officials, or perhaps more importantly, judicial ones, Democrats now have a tool to force action. And that means we've come a long way from a few years ago, when Senate Democrats simply shrugged at the inevitability of the GOP filibuster arguing they had no other option.

I must admit, I didn't expect Republicans to challenge this notion this quickly. And the reason is simple: Even with a truncated and compromised filibuster, Republicans were able to gum up the works to unprecedented levels. As Bill Sher at the Campaign for America's Future notes, the federal judiciary is now evenly balanced, with 390 GOP-appointed judges and 391 Democratic-appointed ones. However, there are 93 vacancies.
<more>

I think they are involved in magical thinking.

In that they believe they will magically control the Senate soon and didn't want to do away with the filibuster on their watch.

 

[rdean]

Republicans have filibustered almost as many of Obama's nominees as all the other presidents combined.

 

[Sallow]

So, just because Obama doesn't get to appoint the judges he wants allows him and his party to justify throwing 225 years of legislative history in the trash? Oh well, this will bite them in the ass. Democrats in Washington are notorious for not thinking things through, i.e. Obamacare.

The filibuster is not in the Constitution and was "invented" by Aaron Burr.

Remember him?

He killed founding father Alexander Hamilton.

 

[bripat9643]

The President is appointing judges?

Since when has he had that power?

He's had the authority for 250 years, moron.

 

[bripat9643]

So, just because Obama doesn't get to appoint the judges he wants allows him and his party to justify throwing 225 years of legislative history in the trash? Oh well, this will bite them in the ass. Democrats in Washington are notorious for not thinking things through, i.e. Obamacare.

The filibuster is not in the Constitution and was "invented" by Aaron Burr.

Remember him?

He killed founding father Alexander Hamilton.

It's too bad he didn't do it a lot earlier.

 

[rightwinger]

The President is appointing judges?

Since when has he had that power?

He's had the authority for 250 years, moron.

Imagine that..

and why should a minority party have the power to block him from doing a duty that has been in effect for 250 years?

 

[Stephanie]

I'm shocked at you Democrats....If the Republicans had pulled this...YOU'D BE screaming bloody murder...

are you so into winning you don't see what abuse this is and is giving a Party and President total POWER over who they put in positions of POWER over you?

No wonder Obama sold you on Transforming our country...He saw with voters like you the time was ripe

 

[P@triot]

Obama just committed an unprecedented tyranny.

This represents a ridiculous power grab from one of the most tyrannical administrations in US History.

Let me ask you a question:

If the party in power in both the presidency and the Senate should not have the right to appoint and approve judges,

who should?

Please be specific and explain your reasoning in detail.

I'm happy to answer your question [MENTION=18701]NYcarbineer[/MENTION] (after all, I've been educating you for years on this board - I feel it is my civic duty since you are completely ignorant of your nations government, it's laws, it's Constitution, and it's history ).

A key goal of the framers was to create a Senate differently constituted from the House so it would be less subject to popular passions and impulses. "The use of the Senate," wrote James Madison in Notes of Debates in the Federal Convention of 1787, "is to consist in its proceedings with more coolness, with more system and with more wisdom, than the popular branch." An oft-quoted story about the "coolness" of the Senate involves George Washington and Thomas Jefferson, who was in France during the Constitutional Convention. Upon his return, Jefferson visited Washington and asked why the Convention delegates had created a Senate. "Why did you pour that tea into your saucer?" asked Washington. "To cool it," said Jefferson. "Even so," responded Washington, "we pour legislation into the senatorial saucer to cool it."

And this is exactly why Obama and the Dumbocrats (such as yourself) hate the Senate and it's rules. It prevents the majority from fast-tracking this nation into disaster (which is what ignorant Dumbocrat policy does). The entire intent of our founders was to create a slow, methodical legislation process so that impulsive ignorance (ie Dumbocrat policy...can you say Obamacare?) did not destroy what so much blood was shed to create.

Any questions?

U.S. Senate: Legislation & Records Home > Legislative Process > Senate Legislative Process

 

[P@triot]

The President is appointing judges?

Since when has he had that power?

He's had the authority for 250 years, moron.

Imagine that..

and why should a minority party have the power to block him from doing a duty that has been in effect for 250 years?

Um, you do realize for 250 years the "minority power" had the power to block him as well, don't you?

Of course not...what the hell am I saying? You're a willfully ignorant Dumbocrat who has never seen the Constitution!