Why senate Dems. MUST filibuster Gorsuch's consent.....

[nat4900]

Not at all. It's Harry Weed who did that. He was the one that changed the stipulations that Senate does have the authority to change the rules to a simple majority to select a SC judge. Republicans are just simply exercising that change.

I'd never defend Reid, he was an idiot.......However, he was "smart" enough" to keep SCOTUS nominee to the 60 vote threshold......So, let McConnell double down and change the rules again, and we will all see the repercussions.

 

[thanatos144]

So in your mind a person who actually want to follow the constitution and do his Job correctly is unfit for the job of Chief Justice.... Never dawns on you idiot progressives that this is why you are losing elections does it?

In all fairness Obama/dems were blasted for following the Constitution when he nominated a replacement for Scalia. The Constitution clearly granted Obama that power and obligation.

I'm no Obama fan, and I don't mind Trump's pick...but if we're going to pull the "follow the Constitution" card-we need to be consistent when we do. Obama's nomination should have went to a vote...why? Because that's what the Constitution says.

Th eery didn't get blasted they just don't get the nominee confirmed

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

 

[nat4900]

Without one ounce of evidence to support your claim.

Well, I often simply state MY opinion....But to disregard the blatant racism against Obama by many (not all) conservatives, is to dismiss reality.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

They only do one thing, and that is determine if X is constitutional or not.

Sure, we all wish that were the case...But the responsibility of a justice is not just to do a "word search" between a case and the Constitution. But the Constitution does NOT state that corporations are the same as "common citizens" and the Constitution does NOT state that a state supreme court should stop a recount on a presidential election.

The courts define law. That's it.

The Florida law stated that all ballots have to be certified in seven days, no if's, and's, or buts about it. If you want a recount, fine, have a recount, but have the ballots certified in seven days.

The Florida federal courts changed the law on the bench. They stated that Gore could take all the time he needed regardless of the law. This is called Judicial Legislation. The courts can't do that. They also stated that Gore could conduct recounts in Democrat favored areas only; another violation of Florida laws. All recounts have to be held equally in both Republican and Democrat districts. If you recount three districts in Democrat areas, you have to do recounts in three Republican areas.

When the Supreme Court got the case, they sent it back to the Florida court and asked WTF was going on? Why are they making laws on the bench of a federal court? They asked the Florida court to explain their actions!

This is what the Supreme Court is for. It's against our Constitution for any court to bypass and even create new laws. That's what representatives are for. The courts job (especially federal court) is to determine if a law was followed or not.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Without one ounce of evidence to support your claim.

Well, I often simply state MY opinion....But to disregard the blatant racism against Obama by many (not all) conservatives, is to dismiss reality.

In eight years of Obama, the only ones to bring up race were you Democrats. We didn't bring up his race. His race had nothing to do with his anti-American polices.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

So in your mind a person who actually want to follow the constitution and do his Job correctly is unfit for the job of Chief Justice..

A "conclusion" that is moronic....as expected from an ultra right winger.

Every fucking nominee to the SCOTUS spews, "I want to follow the Constitution"........few do when they're really partisan hacks and Gorsuch's previous rulings PROVE that he is driven by religious zealotry.

Which rulings?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Not at all. It's Harry Weed who did that. He was the one that changed the stipulations that Senate does have the authority to change the rules to a simple majority to select a SC judge. Republicans are just simply exercising that change.

I'd never defend Reid, he was an idiot.......However, he was "smart" enough" to keep SCOTUS nominee to the 60 vote threshold......So, let McConnell double down and change the rules again, and we will all see the repercussions.

What he did was change the rules TO allow the Senate the ability to change the rules in the event of a filibuster. if the Republicans do get 60 votes, there will be no need for them to change the rules either.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

So in your mind a person who actually want to follow the constitution and do his Job correctly is unfit for the job of Chief Justice.... Never dawns on you idiot progressives that this is why you are losing elections does it?

In all fairness Obama/dems were blasted for following the Constitution when he nominated a replacement for Scalia. The Constitution clearly granted Obama that power and obligation.

I'm no Obama fan, and I don't mind Trump's pick...but if we're going to pull the "follow the Constitution" card-we need to be consistent when we do. Obama's nomination should have went to a vote...why? Because that's what the Constitution says.

The Constitution gives no timeline either.

Scalia passed away in Obama's last year of Presidency. Based on the previous midterm elections, people were not happy with Democrat policies. Because we can't use midterms to determine the mood of the citizens, it was only right to allow us to make the decision of the next SC justice based on the presidential election.

This is different in that we as a country did decide on which way we want our country to go; particularly when it comes to the SC nomination.

 

[nat4900]

The Constitution gives no timeline either.

Excellent.....Lets then wait until the 2018 or 2020 elections since there are NO timelines in the Constitution, correct?.

 

[Spare_change]

Without one ounce of evidence to support your claim.

Well, I often simply state MY opinion....But to disregard the blatant racism against Obama by many (not all) conservatives, is to dismiss reality.

To blame racism for the incompetence and prejudice of the Obama administration is to dismiss reality.

 

[nat4900]

In eight years of Obama, the only ones to bring up race were you Democrats. We didn't bring up his race. His race had nothing to do with his anti-American polices.

I'm sure you'll state that the moron in this picture is a liberal......and not one of your ilk

 

[Spare_change]

In eight years of Obama, the only ones to bring up race were you Democrats. We didn't bring up his race. His race had nothing to do with his anti-American polices.

I'm sure you'll state that the moron in this picture is a liberal......and not one of your ilk

One guy equals a whole political genre ..... are you sure you want to play that game?

C'mon ... let's play.

 

[Spare_change]

 

[Spare_change]

 

[Spare_change]

 

[Spare_change]

 

[Spare_change]

 

[Spare_change]

 

[Spare_change]

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

The Constitution gives no timeline either.

Excellent.....Lets then wait until the 2018 or 2020 elections since there are NO timelines in the Constitution, correct?.

Sure, bring it on I say.

The Democrats are doing a fantastic job of showing America what Democrats are actually about. Protests, riots, destroying public property, attacking our police officers, destroying private property, destroying colleges.

Nothing helps our recruiting efforts better than what Democrats are doing today. Stop an honorable judge from getting the nomination to the SC? Even better. Let those Democrats show everybody their actions are politically motivated instead of respecting the will of the people.

"Folks, when your adversary begins to make a fool of themselves, the worst thing you can do is stop it. Just take a few steps back, fold your arms together, and enjoy the show."
Rush Limbaugh