Merged Scalia is dead

[Cain]

Actually, you're touching on an important point. I think this will prove to be a Pyrrhic victory for Democrats. Sure, the witch is dead, so to speak, but the balance of power on the Supreme Court is in jeopardy for the first time in decades. The last President to have an opportunity to replace a Supreme Court Justice of the opposing ideology was Bush 41 (George H. W. Bush). He got to replace two liberal ones, but he screwed up and nominated one replacement who was as liberal as the predecessor (i.e. Souter).

This should be a Democratic talking point. We've had a conservative Court for the past twenty years. Bush Sr. had the opportunity to replace liberal Justices with conservative Justices.

The threat to the status quo is a much bigger motivator to those who have more to lose (i.e. conservatives) than to those who have more to gain (i.e. liberals). You can be sure that this will turn out the Republican base for the election, if the Senate chooses to delay approval until next year (which I think it will).

This is an interesting prediction, and there is something to the psychology loss-aversion, but assuming Obama's nomination is not confirmed, the next President will likely get to choose more than one justice. Kennedy is 79, Ginsburg is 82, and Breyer is 77. This is not to say Democrats will think in that frame, but they should.

 

[Cain]

Look for Obama to cry racism as those rascally republicans block his loser nominee. The divider in chief will pull all the stops to get this done.

Ah, so you make no pretense about inhabiting this planet. Obama will not cry racism; he'll call Republicans tendentious obstructionists. The Constitution says the President nominates Justices. The Constitution does not say anything about a court with five conservatives and four liberals. The argument is not a tough sell...

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

... The problem for Republicans is that their wait-and-see approach is not the principled stance; ....

Like they care.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Reprehensible yes. But also the appropriate interpretation of the Constitution.

Your opinion, and not a unanimous one on the court, in fact on the gay marriage ruling, not even the majority.

 

[Belz...]

They're hero's.

You libs have to understand, if your given this nomination our country will be changed for generations. Obama will not get another pick. I hope the repubs understand if they let Obama do this, they will start a violent revolution that cannot be stopped.

We will not be governed by the most immoral among us!!!!

That's some grade A delusion, right there.

 

[BobTheCoward]

Your opinion, and not a unanimous one on the court, in fact on the gay marriage ruling, not even the majority.

Ask yourself: who likely has better insight into a document written and amended (in case of the 14th) by dead white rich male slave owners? Conservatives or liberals?

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

A recess appointment will be made Tuesday morning.

Very doubtful. Obama is going to appoint a successor which is his job as the elected POTUS and make a point of the BS the Pubbies plan to pull to block any appointment he makes.

 

[Tony Stark]

Ask yourself: who likely has better insight into a document written and amended (in case of the 14th) by dead white rich male slave owners? Conservatives or liberals?

I don't give a flying **** what the people who wrote the 14th Amendment would think about things like marriage equality.

I care about how reasonable people today interpret it. And 100% of reasonable people today interpret it in such a way as that laws banning gay marriage are unconstitutional. The only reason people like Scalia disagree is because of bigotry/religion. Their textual originalism is just a cover.

 

[tsig]

You think one issue defines this? I'm one who couldn't care less about homo's have civil unions, its a lot more than that!

Half the country is right thinking, 2/3 of the states are republican. We have the House and the Senate, the country is clearly divided down the middle. Not really clear to you but people aren't going to stand by and allow the wholesale changes this court could have the power to force on people.

Personally I think its time for this country to split into smaller countries. I would do whatever it took to not be governed by socialist thinking people.

Clearly we have to destroy the country to save it.

ETA: You can always leave the country.

 

[angrysoba]

Fairly ghoulish thread so far.




I hope he had a happy ending at least.

Was it that kind of place?

 

[tsig]

True enough, but do you consider the current crop of Republicans rational enough to make the choice that is best for their own interests?

Their propensity for convening circular firing squads is well known.

 

[tsig]

Agreed, but sometimes necessary.

That didn't work out so well last time.

 

[Tony Stark]

That didn't work out so well last time.

Though it is true that the US would be better off if we had been divested of the worthless Confederate states.

 

[tsig]

Pretty sure it's a calculated campaign tactic. I have little doubt the Republicans will use this to motivate their base in the upcoming election. It's one thing to make a general statement the SCOTUS appointments are on the line, it's another to have a position actually up for an appointment.

Their base is in a perpetual state of arousement.

 

[tsig]

It is worst to compromise with Satan.

I wouldn't even negotiate with him but to each his own.

 

[Desert Fox]

Having Logger and Bob the Coward on the forum does have some value. . . . It lets us know what the conservative opinion is.

I suspect that for most of us, Obama is actually on the conservative side of the issues not actually much of a liberal.

 

[Tony Stark]

Having Logger and Bob the Coward on the forum does have some value. . . . It lets us know what the conservative opinion is.

I suspect that for most of us, Obama is actually on the conservative side of the issues not actually much of a liberal.

Compared to Bernie Sanders, no. He is still way to the left of Republicans. The world is very lucky that the American people were smart enough to elect him. Twice.

 

[Desert Fox]

This is another good one out of Scalia:
“There is no basis in text, tradition, or even in contemporary practice (if that were enough), for finding in the Constitution a right to demand judicial consideration of newly discovered evidence of innocence brought forward after conviction.”
http://news.lawreader.com/2008/08/2...-they-believe-justice-should-trump-procedure/

 

[quadraginta]

Ask yourself: who likely has better insight into a document written and amended (in case of the 14th) by dead white rich male slave owners? Conservatives or liberals?

Do you think that the Constitution was written by conservatives, and that rich white slave owners were responsible for the 14th Amendment?

To answer your question, obviously it would be liberals.

 

[BobTheCoward]

Having Logger and Bob the Coward on the forum does have some value. . . . It lets us know what the conservative opinion is.

I suspect that for most of us, Obama is actually on the conservative side of the issues not actually much of a liberal.

You know I'm not conservative, right? I believe scalias opinions were often correct AND we should amend the Constitution to fix them.