• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Merged Scalia is dead

JPK said:
You would think they would have learned that the American public is smarter than that and can see right through this game.
Click to expand...

And yet after many year of obstruction at the last senate election where the senates places were for up for grab, republican made a killing a gained seats.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_elections,_2014


So either the American public is not that smart, or there is another effect you are not taking into account.
 
I have to ask if there's been an equivalent situation with a Republican President and what happeneded then. I'm guessing there was no holding off until after the election in those circumstances?

This seems to be the most naked piece of obstructionism by the Repubkican party to date. Not even a pretence this is about policy or the qualities of a particular nominee, just 'we ain't letting the ****** in the White House make an appointment'.
 
JPK said:
Good morning.
Perhaps the most disturbing part of this whole political show, which started before Scalia's body was even cold, is that the current GOP leaders and current candidates feel perfectly comfortable making the ridiculous statement that they will block whoever Obama might nominate simply because HE nominated them. No need to listen to see who might be nominated, simply obstruct anything and everything the POTUS tries to do. Not based on any reason other than to stop the POTUS to do anything. Of course this isn't new. It's been the stated plan of the GOP leaders since Obama was elected. You would think they would have learned that the American public is smarter than that and can see right through this game. Claiming they are doing this to let the American public have a say in the decision is just another example of the GOP leaders inability to acknowledge that they don't have a clue what the American public want. The American public have had their say, not once but TWICE, when they voted Obama in as POTUS. Do the GOP leaders and candidates think the American public are so stupid that they didn't realize that the president they voted for would have as his responsibility to pick Supreme Court Justices? Are they saying that while the president will recognize his responsibility to do his job and nominate a replacement, they will continue to neglect their responsibility to do their jobs once again do whatever it takes to NOT do their jobs and simply play the part of a speed bump? I give the American public more credit than they do. I'm thinking they are tired of this failure on the part of the GOP leaders to do their jobs and will respond by telling them not only in the Presidential election but will be giving the Senate a makeover as well.
Click to expand...
News flash! The US is still a republic, not a monarchy, and the GOP won the 2010 and 2014 midterms by wide margins. You'd never know it from reading this board, but Obama is very unpopular among the public at large, which is why his name is barely mentioned in the Dem debates and repeated all the time by the GOP.

As for whether Congress can stall Obama's nominee: they damn well can, and it would serve him right. Obama has been unbelievably contemptuous of Congress, especially his second term. As Obama himself said, "elections have consequences." Or put another way, what goes around comes around.
 
ChristianProgressive said:
I really hope the board admins turn a certain user's identity over to HS before the whole board gets implicated for inciting armed violence.
Click to expand...

Who is HS?

Also, where did you get the risible idea that anything that Logger said comes anywhere close to criminal incitement of violence?


.............
ETA
wait. Were you joking? I sometimes miss posters doing things ironically or for humorous value

MORE ETA
Ah, Homeland Security.
The second question still stands.
 
Last edited:
KwamiFabu said:
News flash! The US is still a republic, not a monarchy, and the GOP won the 2010 and 2014 midterms by wide margins. You'd never know it from reading this board, but Obama is very unpopular among the public at large, which is why his name is barely mentioned in the Dem debates and repeated all the time by the GOP.

As for whether Congress can stall Obama's nominee: they damn well can, and it would serve him right. Obama has been unbelievably contemptuous of Congress, especially his second term. As Obama himself said, "elections have consequences." Or put another way, what goes around comes around.
Click to expand...

Just saying but your own link show him as more popular than bush 2006, and frankly compared to the popularity of your congress... Which is at an all time low.... Also it is a gallup poll. If they are still using their old method they have to massively correct for age.
 
Last edited:
Aepervius said:
Just saying but your own link show him as more popular than bush 2006, and frankly compared to the popularity of your congress... Which is at an all time low....
Click to expand...

Your post, while full of fact, does not fit the narrative and will be dismissed by the Fox News fans.
 
Tony Stark said:
T
If Republicans are smart, they will allow Obama to appoint a moderate. Doing otherwise will prove that they are worthless obstructionists to most people..
Click to expand...

Wait, what?

You seem to be asserting that there are measurable numbers of people out there who are unaware that the Republicans in Congress are obstructionists AND that this one move (rejecting every Obama nomination) will suddenly open their eyes and allow them to see how obstructionist the Republicans are.

Surely, you see how silly that position is.
 
Tony Stark said:
Yes, people were (and most Republicans still are) largely bigots and did not actually care about equal protection under the law. Supreme Court justices are subsets of people. It took them about 100 years to strike down laws thay denied equal protection wrt interracial marriage and 150 years wrt gay marriage. Though the latter was unanimous while the latter 5-4. For the sole reason there were four bigots on the Supreme Court. Thankfully, we are now down to three.



No we aren't.
Click to expand...

If there is dispute on the 14th amendment application, we absolutely have to defer to dead bigots.

It is what makes loving v Virginia such a travesty of law.
 
Ladewig said:
Wait, what?

You seem to be asserting that there are measurable numbers of people out there who are unaware that the Republicans in Congress are obstructionists AND that this one move (rejecting every Obama nomination) will suddenly open their eyes and allow them to see how obstructionist the Republicans are.

Surely, you see how silly that position is.
Click to expand...
Leaving a Supreme Court seat open for a year is completely unprecedented.
 
KwamiFabu said:
Obama has been unbelievably contemptuous of Congress, especially his second term.
Click to expand...

And frankly congress has been FAR far more contemptuous of Obama than the other way around. Attempt to be block, repel , fight ACA all the time, birther and so forth.

Your congress has been a contemptuous obstruction the whole past years including obstruction and stopping federal budget.

Pretending that Obama has been contemptuous is rewriting history. The last congress has been contemptuous of the American public and government process at a whole.

Note that I am not saying Obama was very good at his job, he certainly promised far more than he delivered, and Guantanamo is still standing. But contemptuous ? To the congress ? Are you kidding me ?
 
Last edited:
Ladewig said:
Wait, what?

You seem to be asserting that there are measurable numbers of people out there who are unaware that the Republicans in Congress are obstructionists AND that this one move (rejecting every Obama nomination) will suddenly open their eyes and allow them to see how obstructionist the Republicans are.

Surely, you see how silly that position is.
Click to expand...

Well not so silly as a few post above shows that the perception from some is that Obama was in contempt of congress, not the other way around.
 
BobTheCoward said:
If there is dispute on the 14th amendment application, we absolutely have to defer to dead bigots.

It is what makes loving v Virginia such a travesty of law.
Click to expand...
Says who. There is nothing in the Constitution that says the opinion of dead bigots takes precedence. We can absolutely decide that their opinion is irrelevant and that equal protection actually means equal protection. Like all nine Supreme Court justices did in Loving v Virginia.
 
Last edited:
Aepervius said:
Well not so silly as a few post above shows that the perception from some is that Obama was in contempt of congress, not the other way around.
Click to expand...

Right. So why would people with that opinion suddenly do a 180 instead of saying, "Obama's nomination is grossly unacceptable. Obama is at fault; not the Republicans"?

Tony Stark said:
Leaving a Supreme Court seat open for a year is completely unprecedented.
Click to expand...

I was not joking. I think it is absurd beyond words to think there are measurable numbers of people who will suddenly say "hey, the Republicans are being obstructionists." So ******* what if it is unprecedented? Who are these people who were completely ignorant of the previous obstructionism but will suddenly come over to your side once they Republicans cross this line?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom