Some simple facts about our current and future Supreme Court

[paperview]

Fact 6 Obamas nominees must pass a vetting process by the Senate before being confirmed.

Just like every Justice in the past

Which is why MY preference is,to let Obama nominate whomever he wants, and simply have the Senate vote them down repeatedly.

Obama has appointed well over a dozen circuit and district judges which the Senate voted unanimously in favor of.

If Obama nominates one of these, it will be pretty hard for the Republicans vote against them without looking like raging hypocrites.

This is why McConnell has said he won't even allow the Senate to vote on nominees, thus proving once again just how much the GOP hates the Constitution when it is inconvenient to their political hackery.

Obama has appointed well over a dozen circuit and district judges which the Senate voted unanimously in favor of.

Hmm, Bork was also appointed unanimously, to the United States Court of Appeals.

Didn't fare so well as nominee for SCOTUS, did he?

Well, first he had a majority GOP senate to help shuffle him along in 1981, and after Bork's rulings and paper trail that accrued during his circuit time, we got a better eye into his extremists views -- and during his SCOTUS nominee hearings he was only too happy to share how much he was A-Otay with poll taxes and his stated desire to roll back civil rights decisions, which horrified many, and we learned more about his role in the Saturday Night Massacre during those hearings as well.

He was such a poor candidate for SCOTUS, he went down in history as having one of the biggest loss of a vote to reject him evah, with numerous of his own party saying "nyet."

 

[paperview]

I've already heard ads are running with McConnell standing up for "the people's right to choose" the next SCOTUS nominee -

It's going to look great juxtaposed with McConnell's previous words --

"The majority in the Senate is prepared to restore the Senate's traditions and precedents to ensure that regardless of party, any president's judicial nominees, after full and fair debate, receive a simple up-or-down vote on the Senate floor.

It is time to move away from advise and obstruct and get back to advise and consent." -Addison Mitchell McConnell, Jr.

"The Frist fairness rule guarantees up-or-down votes for every circuit court or Supreme Court nomination, regardless of which party controls the Senate or the White House...It guarantees every president that their judicial nominees will get through committee and get a vote on the Senate floor." -Addison Mitchell McConnell, Jr.

 

[nat4900]

Dude, I've read that book quite a few times. It's my favorite political science book of all time.

Show me: Democracy in America: TOC

Our judges wear robes and are called "your honor" because of long standing tradition from the Old World.

There's no argument between you and I on this, and you've answered your own question when you state that there are REMNANTS of the "Old World" that we have not wanted to eliminate altogether....That is my point, as was Tocqueville's

 

[nat4900]

Hmm, Bork was also appointed unanimously, to the United States Court of Appeals.

Didn't fare so well as nominee for SCOTUS, did he?

I've had to restate this several times because right wingers are either ignorant of refuse to accept simple reality......Bork was an extremely poor choice; the guy was AGAINST voting rights, AGAINST women;s rights, AGAINST the ACLU and was complicit in Nixon's Watergate......(and for his complicity the quid pro quo was to be appointed to the SCOTUS)....... and THAT is why the guy was summarily rejected.

Learn your history right wingers.

 

[nat4900]

One thing you can count on. Liberals will always end up with their own actions coming back to bite them in their collective asses. Biden, Obama, Shummer. All of them. Power corrupts. Just as the Liberal Democrats shoved Obamacare down the throats of the American people. Just as Obama is closing Gitmo. Obama is doing all he can do in his last months to cripple any Republican Presidency that succeeds him. The Liberal Dems have made their own bed. Payback will be swift and painful. Suck it up Liberals. There's a new day dawning and injustices to be corrected.

Many of us are actually counting on your (and your ilk's) short-sighted stupidity...I fully expect that ANY nominee by Obama will be rejected.....HOWEVER, with the WH almost surely in Dems hands and the senate soon to turn to a blue majority in 2017.....what could have been a moderate nominee by Obama may then turn to an ultra liberal nomination AND confirmation. Suck it up, right wingers....LOL

 

[the_human_being]

One thing you can count on. Liberals will always end up with their own actions coming back to bite them in their collective asses. Biden, Obama, Shummer. All of them. Power corrupts. Just as the Liberal Democrats shoved Obamacare down the throats of the American people. Just as Obama is closing Gitmo. Obama is doing all he can do in his last months to cripple any Republican Presidency that succeeds him. The Liberal Dems have made their own bed. Payback will be swift and painful. Suck it up Liberals. There's a new day dawning and injustices to be corrected.

Many of us are actually counting on your (and your ilk's) short-sighted stupidity...I fully expect that ANY nominee by Obama will be rejected.....HOWEVER, with the WH almost surely in Dems hands and the senate soon to turn to a blue majority in 2017.....what could have been a moderate nominee by Obama may then turn to an ultra liberal nomination AND confirmation. Suck it up, right wingers....LOL

More insane prediction from the Left. Trump is finished. Trump is toast. AGAIN. Trump draws more to a rally than voted for Hillary in Nevada.

 

[the_human_being]

Hmm, Bork was also appointed unanimously, to the United States Court of Appeals.

Didn't fare so well as nominee for SCOTUS, did he?

I've had to restate this several times because right wingers are either ignorant of refuse to accept simple reality......Bork was an extremely poor choice; the guy was AGAINST voting rights, AGAINST women;s rights, AGAINST the ACLU and was complicit in Nixon's Watergate......(and for his complicity the quid pro quo was to be appointed to the SCOTUS)....... and THAT is why the guy was summarily rejected.

Learn your history right wingers.

We prefer to teach you concerning the FUTURE!!

 

[Montrovant]

Fact 1: There is NO doubt that for the last 2 decades, the SCOTUS has been right leaning with dozens of decisions rendered 5-4 in favor of conservative causes. Reagan's and Bush's 2 term presidencies ensured such leanings.

Fact 2: Regardless of how we would all like for Justices in the SC to be 100% impartial, each individual who has served as Justice carries a certain amount of political bias and not even the Founders could have avoided such partialities and such is not necessarily a bad thing…We are ALL judged by our peers and we all know of our own frailties, biases and prejudices. (Note that Tocqueville in his Democracy in America commented that America has a tacit wish for a nobility class and shows this in its justice system by having judges wear robes and be referred to as “your honor”)

Fact 3: The Founders, in their wisdom, chose to state (Article 2) that an elected president….NOT Congress (i.e. Senate) nor the electorate……nominates a Justice when a position is vacant, while the senate confirms (or not).

Fact 4: Obama was elected TWICE, showing that the majority of voters wanted his policies to proceed.

Fact 5: Based on Fact 4, Obama’s future (and past) nominees will reflect the leanings of his policies since elections DO have consequences…..

Lastly, as has been often cited before, Obama was elected for FOUR full years, not 3 years, and the fact that the SC may soon have a 5-4 “bent” for more liberal causes is just a “swing of the pendulum” after 20 plus years of right leaning decisions.

I love politics, where else does personal bias and interpretation become fact?

Sports!

 

[Arizona Willie]

Fact 6 Obamas nominees must pass a vetting process by the Senate before being confirmed.

Just like every Justice in the past

========
That is partially true.

The Constitution does NOT specify that the Senate VOTES ... only that they CONSENT.

This consent has, in the past, been determined by voting === but it could be argued that if they don't even vote THAT is consent.

If Obama nominates and 90 days later they have not even voted then it is consent in absentia.

Voting is the only way they can decline his nominee. So if they don't vote then they consent.

 

[Anathema]

Many of us are actually counting on your (and your ilk's) short-sighted stupidity...I fully expect that ANY nominee by Obama will be rejected.....HOWEVER, with the WH almost surely in Dems hands and the senate soon to turn to a blue majority in 2017.....what could have been a moderate nominee by Obama may then turn to an ultra liberal nomination AND confirmation. Suck it up, right wingers....LOL

That's when all of us Righties take your Left Wing advice to embrace our European/British heritage and BURN WASHINGTON TO THE GROUND.

 

[Ringel05]

Fact 1: There is NO doubt that for the last 2 decades, the SCOTUS has been right leaning with dozens of decisions rendered 5-4 in favor of conservative causes. Reagan's and Bush's 2 term presidencies ensured such leanings.

Fact 2: Regardless of how we would all like for Justices in the SC to be 100% impartial, each individual who has served as Justice carries a certain amount of political bias and not even the Founders could have avoided such partialities and such is not necessarily a bad thing…We are ALL judged by our peers and we all know of our own frailties, biases and prejudices. (Note that Tocqueville in his Democracy in America commented that America has a tacit wish for a nobility class and shows this in its justice system by having judges wear robes and be referred to as “your honor”)

Fact 3: The Founders, in their wisdom, chose to state (Article 2) that an elected president….NOT Congress (i.e. Senate) nor the electorate……nominates a Justice when a position is vacant, while the senate confirms (or not).

Fact 4: Obama was elected TWICE, showing that the majority of voters wanted his policies to proceed.

Fact 5: Based on Fact 4, Obama’s future (and past) nominees will reflect the leanings of his policies since elections DO have consequences…..

Lastly, as has been often cited before, Obama was elected for FOUR full years, not 3 years, and the fact that the SC may soon have a 5-4 “bent” for more liberal causes is just a “swing of the pendulum” after 20 plus years of right leaning decisions.

I love politics, where else does personal bias and interpretation become fact?

Sports!

Religion!!

 

[nat4900]

More insane prediction from the Left. Trump is finished. Trump is toast. AGAIN. Trump draws more to a rally than voted for Hillary in Nevada.

Lots of people just love the circus.......especially the clowns.

 

[nat4900]

Bear this in mind, right wingers....There will be challenges to the Citizen United shitty decisions.....A moderate nominee by Obama may uphold it....but a liberal nominated by Clinton may be just the swing vote to overturn that bad decision. Gamble away, my friends !!!!

 

[the_human_being]

More insane prediction from the Left. Trump is finished. Trump is toast. AGAIN. Trump draws more to a rally than voted for Hillary in Nevada.

Lots of people just love the circus.......especially the clowns.

You're really desperate now that it is apparent that Trump will be the next President. Get ready for a lot of hurt.

 

[the_human_being]

Fact 1: There is NO doubt that for the last 2 decades, the SCOTUS has been right leaning with dozens of decisions rendered 5-4 in favor of conservative causes. Reagan's and Bush's 2 term presidencies ensured such leanings.

Fact 2: Regardless of how we would all like for Justices in the SC to be 100% impartial, each individual who has served as Justice carries a certain amount of political bias and not even the Founders could have avoided such partialities and such is not necessarily a bad thing…We are ALL judged by our peers and we all know of our own frailties, biases and prejudices. (Note that Tocqueville in his Democracy in America commented that America has a tacit wish for a nobility class and shows this in its justice system by having judges wear robes and be referred to as “your honor”)

Fact 3: The Founders, in their wisdom, chose to state (Article 2) that an elected president….NOT Congress (i.e. Senate) nor the electorate……nominates a Justice when a position is vacant, while the senate confirms (or not).

Fact 4: Obama was elected TWICE, showing that the majority of voters wanted his policies to proceed.

Fact 5: Based on Fact 4, Obama’s future (and past) nominees will reflect the leanings of his policies since elections DO have consequences…..

Lastly, as has been often cited before, Obama was elected for FOUR full years, not 3 years, and the fact that the SC may soon have a 5-4 “bent” for more liberal causes is just a “swing of the pendulum” after 20 plus years of right leaning decisions.

I love politics, where else does personal bias and interpretation become fact?

Sports!

Religion!!

Saturday Night Live.

 

[the_human_being]

Bear this in mind, right wingers....There will be challenges to the Citizen United shitty decisions.....A moderate nominee by Obama may uphold it....but a liberal nominated by Clinton may be just the swing vote to overturn that bad decision. Gamble away, my friends !!!!

Hillary won't allow it to be overturned. She loves Super Pacs.

 

[nat4900]

You're really desperate now that it is apparent that Trump will be the next President. Get ready for a lot of hurt.

Of course (given your proclivities) you won't believe this...But I, and many of my friends, are ecstatic that Trump WILL be the nominee for the GOP.......I'm not a great Hillary supporter, but your choosing Trump will make Hillary election so damn much easier.......Just wait when Trump will be asked to "elaborate" a bit more on his plans besides a wall paid by Mexico.

(BTW, Trump is the MOST liberal of any of the GOP clown posse candidates.)

 

[nat4900]

Hillary won't allow it to be overturned. She loves Super Pacs.

I'd agree if a SCOTUS nomination were to happen in her third year, BUT since it would come up in the very first months of her administration, she'll have no choice but to name an ultra liberal to the bench.
Again, gamble away on Obama's nominee.

 

[the_human_being]

You're really desperate now that it is apparent that Trump will be the next President. Get ready for a lot of hurt.

Of course (given your proclivities) you won't believe this...But I, and many of my friends, are ecstatic that Trump WILL be the nominee for the GOP.......I'm not a great Hillary supporter, but your choosing Trump will make Hillary election so damn much easier.......Just wait when Trump will be asked to "elaborate" a bit more on his plans besides a wall paid by Mexico.

(BTW, Trump is the MOST liberal of any of the GOP clown posse candidates.)

Anyone can destroy Hillary. Bernie just refuses to do it. She has so much that can be attacked. Her Wall Street donors, the Clinton Crime Family Foundation, her Bosnia sniper fire, her handling of the Libya disaster, her incompetence in the handling of the embassy murders of Stevens and the others, her attacks upon the women Bill assaulted, her mishandling of top secret emails and unsecured server, etc. All this will come out.

 

[the_human_being]

Hillary won't allow it to be overturned. She loves Super Pacs.

I'd agree if a SCOTUS nomination were to happen in her third year, BUT since it would come up in the very first months of her administration, she'll have no choice but to name an ultra liberal to the bench.
Again, gamble away on Obama's nominee.

We intend to. Suck it up.