• 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

sunmaster14 said:
Sorry, but I've already addressed this. It is a patina of moderate language, but it is disingenuous. He's leaving open the possibility that a nomination can be agreed on in the throes of a Presidential election, if (and only if) Senate democrats like the selection. Why wouldn't he? It's a no-lose position to take. I actually think the Republican position is more principled (to wait until a new President is elected before confirming a new justice, regardless), although I suspect they would not adhere to it either if Obama nominated somebody they liked.
Click to expand...

Biden said he would want congress to vote to reject nominees based on their political leanings.

McConnell said he wouldn't even accept that a nomination had been made regardless of everything.

Stop pretending those are the same thing.
 
elbe said:
And they nominate him/her? Potential blowback from the pro-obstructionist hard right wing of the party? Of course they're probably angry the GOP isn't constantly trying to impeach Obama so the party may just not care that much.
Click to expand...

One of the articles above pointed out they backed Obama when he unconditionally was willing to advance Bush tax cuts. They are open to it.
 
theprestige said:
What is the downside for Senate Republicans if Obama nominates a conservative?
Click to expand...
When they turn it down, they look like petty obstructionists. And since the majority of people want them to do their jobs, this isn't good for them. Especially since the Senate seats up for graps this election favor Democrats.

And if they do confirm, their own base will be very upset with them.
 
ehcks said:
Biden said he would want congress to vote to reject nominees based on their political leanings.

McConnell said he wouldn't even accept that a nomination had been made regardless of everything.

Stop pretending those are the same thing.
Click to expand...

Right, the Republicans' stand is more principled (although not one I agree with). I suspect they won't stick to it, however, if Obama nominates somebody they like.
 
sunmaster14 said:
Right, the Republicans' stand is more principled (although not one I agree with). I suspect they won't stick to it, however, if Obama nominates somebody they like.
Click to expand...
Their stance isn't even slightly principled since they would have no issue whatsoever replacing a dead Justice in an election year if a Republican was President.

And I am pretty convinced that the GOP will automatically dislike anyone that Obama nominates. Even if that person is a Republican and/or has already been confirmed by the Senate unanimously for a position on a lower court.
 
sunmaster14 said:
Who is they [their]? One or two Congressional leaders who made an off-hand comment or two which could be interpreted in many different ways? And those comments represent the entire party for eight years?
Click to expand...

You're aware that the party and house have leaders, right?

I like the cock-blocking metaphor by the way. It's as if the Republicans were preventing the Democrats from screwing the country.
Click to expand...

For someone who accused me of having ideological blinders, your ideological fly is down, Sunmaster, and we can see everything.
 
Argumemnon said:
You're aware that the party and house have leaders, right?



For someone who accused me of having ideological blinders, your ideological fly is down, Sunmaster, and we can see everything.
Click to expand...

Nice metaphor. Am I a firm believer? Ironically, I do dress to the left.

By the way, although I am ideological, I don't think I have blinders. I try to understand the other side's point of view, and, for the most part, I think I'm successful. I don't believe you understand the conservative point of view, though, and that was my point.
 
sunmaster14 said:
By the way, most of the people (in the US) dying of preventable diseases are doing so because of their own poor choices (or their parents'). Most of the people who are hungry and/or starving (are there really any in the US?) are doing so because of their own poor choices (or their parents')...
Click to expand...

This sounds more like elitism than conservatism. Or are they basically the same thing? ;)
 
If my taxes have to support 5 people who are hungry because of their poor choices to make sure 5 have support because they are hungry through no fault of their own than so be it.

The alternative is to cut support for everybody because of the 5 with poor choices, which seems like what most conservatives are in to these days.
 
Tony Stark said:
And if they do confirm, their own base will be very upset with them.
Click to expand...
Why are you so sure of this?

Senate Republicans have reversed themselves on obstruction before, when Obama offered something attractive to them. The wrath of their base didn't materialize then, why would it materialize now?

Why would the conservative base of the party be upset if Senate Republicans confirmed a conservative justice to the Supreme Court?

Wouldn't their ideological blinders more likely cause them to overlook the Senate's flip-flop in favor of making Obama the dupe in this scenario?
 
theprestige said:
Why are you so sure of this?

Senate Republicans have reversed themselves on obstruction before, when Obama offered something attractive to them. The wrath of their base didn't materialize then, why would it materialize now?

Why would the conservative base of the party be upset if Senate Republicans confirmed a conservative justice to the Supreme Court?

Wouldn't their ideological blinders more likely cause them to overlook the Senate's flip-flop in favor of making Obama the dupe in this scenario?
Click to expand...
The GOP base is irrational and ignorant. They think that Mitch McConnell is a RINO who lets Obama walk all over him.

And they think that half the Republicans on the court (Roberts and Kennedy) are Obama's puppets. Of course they would think the same thing about one nominated by Obama himself.
 
Tony Stark said:
The GOP base is irrational and ignorant. They think that Mitch McConnell is a RINO who lets Obama walk all over him.

And they think that half the Republicans on the court (Roberts and Kennedy) are Obama's puppets. Of course they would think the same thing about one nominated by Obama himself.
Click to expand...

That's why you need to funnel money into education, not "defense".
 
As a medical friend of mine once put it, the GOP is on the horns of an enema. Do they go ahead and confirm a moderate justice and tick off the base, or do they block the nominee and a) get labeled as obstructionist and b) get a much more liberal nominee jammed down their throats by President Clinton and the incoming Dem-controlled Senate?
 
Tony Stark said:
The GOP base is irrational and ignorant. They think that Mitch McConnell is a RINO who lets Obama walk all over him.

And they think that half the Republicans on the court (Roberts and Kennedy) are Obama's puppets. Of course they would think the same thing about one nominated by Obama himself.
Click to expand...

Sure, but we already know that the GOP base doesn't stop voting when they're angry at their own party. They just vote for someone even further right. Extreme Republicans getting primaried by even extremer Republicans.

Making them upset doesn't make them weaker. It just makes them louder.
 
ehcks said:
Sure, but we already know that the GOP base doesn't stop voting when they're angry at their own party. They just vote for someone even further right. Extreme Republicans getting primaried by even extremer Republicans.

Making them upset doesn't make them weaker. It just makes them louder.
Click to expand...

But really, how many of those people are there? Are they a tiny but noisy minority, or are they more significant?
 
Tony Stark said:
The GOP base is irrational and ignorant. They think that Mitch McConnell is a RINO who lets Obama walk all over him.

And they think that half the Republicans on the court (Roberts and Kennedy) are Obama's puppets. Of course they would think the same thing about one nominated by Obama himself.
Click to expand...

Do you disagree with them? How would you characterize those three people?
 
Argumemnon said:
But really, how many of those people are there? Are they a tiny but noisy minority, or are they more significant?
Click to expand...
These people are the reason that a complete joke of a candidate (Donald Trump) is probably going to be the Republican nominee.
 
BobTheCoward said:
Do you disagree with them? How would you characterize those three people?
Click to expand...

I would assume that they all are their own individuals who hold personal opinions unique to them. Maybe sometimes they, gasp, agree with Obama! Maybe sometimes their interpretation of the law goes against their own party. Maybe sometimes they want to work with people across the aisle than just yell at them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom