Scalia question

[Billy_Kinetta]

Can Republican's prevent Obama from making new appointment? I think appointment should be made by the new President. Obama lame duck, USSC lifetime position, so if new Justice is say 46 years old to 50 years old, he or she can be on bench for 30 years or even 40 years. Obama choose Leftist of course, so your First and Second Amendments might be at risk.

The new President should make this appointment IMHO.

Sorry you don't like who the president is. Rules are rules. It's Obama's pick.

And the Senate's choice to approve or not, or even act upon it.

He's a pot head, you're wasting your time explaining stuff to him.

And your a loser but we explain stuff to you all the time.

You're.

Thank me later.

 

[defcon4]

Can Republican's prevent Obama from making new appointment? I think appointment should be made by the new President. Obama lame duck, USSC lifetime position, so if new Justice is say 46 years old to 50 years old, he or she can be on bench for 30 years or even 40 years. Obama choose Leftist of course, so your First and Second Amendments might be at risk.

The new President should make this appointment IMHO.

What happens if a democrat gets elected president?

....with a democrat congress. Ouch!!!

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Can Republican's prevent Obama from making new appointment? I think appointment should be made by the new President. Obama lame duck, USSC lifetime position, so if new Justice is say 46 years old to 50 years old, he or she can be on bench for 30 years or even 40 years. Obama choose Leftist of course, so your First and Second Amendments might be at risk.

The new President should make this appointment IMHO.

Sorry you don't like who the president is. Rules are rules. It's Obama's pick.

And the Senate's choice to approve or not, or even act upon it.

He's a pot head, you're wasting your time explaining stuff to him.

Yes, but I must confess there's a certain remote amusement to kicking the slow-witted here.

Dont pretend scalias timing is good. You know its not dummy

Granted, but has little to do with the Senate's ability to tell Obama to sit in the corner until January.

 

[S.J.]

Can Republican's prevent Obama from making new appointment? I think appointment should be made by the new President. Obama lame duck, USSC lifetime position, so if new Justice is say 46 years old to 50 years old, he or she can be on bench for 30 years or even 40 years. Obama choose Leftist of course, so your First and Second Amendments might be at risk.

The new President should make this appointment IMHO.

Sorry you don't like who the president is. Rules are rules. It's Obama's pick.

And the Senate's choice to approve or not, or even act upon it.

He's a pot head, you're wasting your time explaining stuff to him.

And your a loser but we explain stuff to you all the time.

You're.

Thank me later.

You beat me to it.

 

[sealybobo]

Can Republican's prevent Obama from making new appointment? I think appointment should be made by the new President. Obama lame duck, USSC lifetime position, so if new Justice is say 46 years old to 50 years old, he or she can be on bench for 30 years or even 40 years. Obama choose Leftist of course, so your First and Second Amendments might be at risk.

The new President should make this appointment IMHO.

Sorry you don't like who the president is. Rules are rules. It's Obama's pick.

And the Senate's choice to approve or not, or even act upon it.

He's a pot head, you're wasting your time explaining stuff to him.

Yes, but I must confess there's a certain remote amusement to kicking the slow-witted here.

I don't think it's amusing so many Americans are dumb like you

 

[sealybobo]

Sorry you don't like who the president is. Rules are rules. It's Obama's pick.

And the Senate's choice to approve or not, or even act upon it.

He's a pot head, you're wasting your time explaining stuff to him.

And your a loser but we explain stuff to you all the time.

You're.

Thank me later.

You beat me to it.

You guys had a beat off

 

[S.J.]

And the Senate's choice to approve or not, or even act upon it.

He's a pot head, you're wasting your time explaining stuff to him.

And your a loser but we explain stuff to you all the time.

You're.

Thank me later.

You beat me to it.

You guys had a beat off

That's right, keep proving us right.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

And the Senate's choice to approve or not, or even act upon it.

He's a pot head, you're wasting your time explaining stuff to him.

And your a loser but we explain stuff to you all the time.

You're.

Thank me later.

You beat me to it.

You guys had a beat off

You just clearly defined the depth of your intellect.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution…

The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.

He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.

The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session.​

So, in short, the President gets to nominate a candidate to fill a vacancy in the Supreme Court; but the candidate cannot actually be appointed to that position without the advice and consent of the Senate.


The current President, Barack Obama, certainly has the authority and the duty to make such a nomination at this point. The Senate is under no obligation to approve that nomination. I know that a few Senators have expressed the opinion that the next President should be the one to pick the person to fill the vacancy left by Mr. Scalia, and if a majority of the Senate agrees, then it is entirely within the Senate's authority to refuse to approve any new Justice nominated by the current President.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

And your a loser but we explain stuff to you all the time.

What could be a greater sign of a “loser”, than being so stupidly illiterate as to not know the difference between “your” and “you're”?

 

[sealybobo]

He's a pot head, you're wasting your time explaining stuff to him.

And your a loser but we explain stuff to you all the time.

You're.

Thank me later.

You beat me to it.

You guys had a beat off

You just clearly defined the depth of your intellect.

Billy & sj agree I must be wrong. Just wait and see

 

[sealybobo]

And your a loser but we explain stuff to you all the time.

What could be a greater sign of a “loser”, than being so stupidly illiterate as to not know the difference between “your” and “you're”?

Oh ewe goat me

 

[S.J.]

And your a loser but we explain stuff to you all the time.

What could be a greater sign of a “loser”, than being so stupidly illiterate as to not know the difference between “your” and “you're”?

That's how you get when all you do is sit around the trailer and get high all day.

 

[defcon4]

Oh ewe goat me

Ewwww... from behind, huh?

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

And your a loser but we explain stuff to you all the time.

You're.

Thank me later.

You beat me to it.

You guys had a beat off

You just clearly defined the depth of your intellect.

Billy & sj agree I must be wrong. Just wait and see

Ah, well, you're not merely wrong, you are fundamentally wrong by way of ignorance.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Oh ewe goat me

Ewwww... from behind, huh?

Goats? Should be the Science and Technology thread.

 

[HenryBHough]

What happens if a democrat gets elected president?

Simple enough. If it's a decent, fair candidate, he/she/it (transgendered and the uncertain encouraged to apply) then the appointment is approved. If it's a flaming liberal and The Senate is Republican it gets rejected. If it's a flaming liberal and The Democrat Hive Mind has The Senate then it gets approved and America is long-term screwed rather than just for four years.

 

[defcon4]

Goats? Should be the Science and Technology thread.

More like a porn thread...

 

[sealybobo]

And your a loser but we explain stuff to you all the time.

What could be a greater sign of a “loser”, than being so stupidly illiterate as to not know the difference between “your” and “you're”?

That's how you get when all you do is sit around the trailer and get high all day.

You mean my condo on a lake?

 

[S.J.]

And your a loser but we explain stuff to you all the time.

What could be a greater sign of a “loser”, than being so stupidly illiterate as to not know the difference between “your” and “you're”?

That's how you get when all you do is sit around the trailer and get high all day.

You mean my condo on a lake?

No, I mean the condo in your head.