Tiberius Posted March 17, 2016 Author Share Posted March 17, 2016 sacrificial lamb They must have had a conversation with him about that. Would loved to have heard that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 17, 2016 Share Posted March 17, 2016 NYTIMES places Garland to the left of Kagan, Breyer, slightly to right of Ginsberg, http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/03/16/us/politics/garland-supreme-court-nomination.html?action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=span-abc-region®ion=span-abc-region&WT.nav=span-abc-region&_r=0 Moderate .......... . He's moderate in that he's rarely activist. He has a proven history of his rulings having a very narrow basis (i.e. doesn't extrapolate new general principles in his rulings, like the Supremes did for gay marriage.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted March 17, 2016 Share Posted March 17, 2016 Pick a non-lawyer for the Supreme Court ! http://usat.ly/1pvDvob via @usatoday Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted March 17, 2016 Share Posted March 17, 2016 Pick a non-lawyer for the Supreme Court ! http://usat.ly/1pvDvob via @usatoday Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted March 17, 2016 Author Share Posted March 17, 2016 That would be great! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted March 17, 2016 Share Posted March 17, 2016 Misleading thread title. I thought this was about Presidential brackets for March Madness You know, important stuff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted March 17, 2016 Share Posted March 17, 2016 On Supreme Court, Republicans are playing by the Democrats’ rules It’s “about a principle, and not a person,” Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said Wednesday of his refusal to consider President Obama’s nomination of Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court. McConnell’s clearly right. And Obama’s party set that principle — the Biden rule. In 1992, then-Judiciary Chairman Joe Biden warned sitting President George H.W. Bush not to try filling any high court vacancies. “Once the political season is under way,” Biden said, “action on a Supreme Court nomination must be put off until after the election campaign is over. That is what is fair to the nominee . . . Otherwise . . . we will be in deep trouble as an institution,” stuck in “a bitter fight, no matter how good a person is nominated by the president.” He was no doubt feeling guilty about his own role in (successfully) demonizing Judge Robert Bork in 1986, and in the (failed) campaign of personal destruction against then-Judge Clarence Thomas in 1991. Biden might as well have said, We don’t want to smear another good man — so don’t send us one. Late in the George W. Bush years, Sen. Chuck Schumer said much the same: “We should reverse the presumption of confirmation” lest the lame-duck president shift the court’s balance. Here’s McConnell on Wednesday: “The next justice could fundamentally alter the direction of the Supreme Court . . . so of course the American people should have a say.” Obama wants Garland to take Antonin Scalia’s seat — replacing a conservative with a liberal. It exactly mirrors the situation where Biden and Schumer drew their lines; why is he pretending the GOP might go along? Again, McConnell has it right: “It seems clear President Obama made this nomination not with the intent of seeing the nominee confirmed, but in order to politicize it for purposes of the election.” That is, to try to paint Republicans as obstructionists for playing by the rules the Democrats set when they ran the Senate. If Democrats want to change those rules, they’ll have to do it when it doesn’t nakedly serve their own partisan interest. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted March 17, 2016 Share Posted March 17, 2016 Pick a non-lawyer for the Supreme Court ! http://usat.ly/1pvDvob via @usatoday Nominating Barry was already proposed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted March 17, 2016 Share Posted March 17, 2016 The aliens guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted March 17, 2016 Share Posted March 17, 2016 The aliens guy. Giorgio? He'd be historic I think, the first justice whose degree was in physical education. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted March 17, 2016 Share Posted March 17, 2016 On Supreme Court, Republicans are playing by the Democrats’ rules It’s “about a principle, and not a person,” Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said Wednesday of his refusal to consider President Obama’s nomination of Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court. McConnell’s clearly right. And Obama’s party set that principle — the Biden rule. In 1992, then-Judiciary Chairman Joe Biden warned sitting President George H.W. Bush not to try filling any high court vacancies. “Once the political season is under way,” Biden said, “action on a Supreme Court nomination must be put off until after the election campaign is over. That is what is fair to the nominee . . . Otherwise . . . we will be in deep trouble as an institution,” stuck in “a bitter fight, no matter how good a person is nominated by the president.” He was no doubt feeling guilty about his own role in (successfully) demonizing Judge Robert Bork in 1986, and in the (failed) campaign of personal destruction against then-Judge Clarence Thomas in 1991. Biden might as well have said, We don’t want to smear another good man — so don’t send us one. Late in the George W. Bush years, Sen. Chuck Schumer said much the same: “We should reverse the presumption of confirmation” lest the lame-duck president shift the court’s balance. Here’s McConnell on Wednesday: “The next justice could fundamentally alter the direction of the Supreme Court . . . so of course the American people should have a say.” Obama wants Garland to take Antonin Scalia’s seat — replacing a conservative with a liberal. It exactly mirrors the situation where Biden and Schumer drew their lines; why is he pretending the GOP might go along? Again, McConnell has it right: “It seems clear President Obama made this nomination not with the intent of seeing the nominee confirmed, but in order to politicize it for purposes of the election.” That is, to try to paint Republicans as obstructionists for playing by the rules the Democrats set when they ran the Senate. If Democrats want to change those rules, they’ll have to do it when it doesn’t nakedly serve their own partisan interest. . OK, so both parties are guilty of playing politics with SCOTUS nominees and similarly so. My view is that the Senate should have the hearings and decide to confirm or not. This is one of the important things that they are elected to do and this is another example of politicians not doing as they should which only furthers the habit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted March 17, 2016 Share Posted March 17, 2016 The aliens guy. Giorgio? He'd be historic I think, the first justice whose degree was in physical education. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 17, 2016 Share Posted March 17, 2016 OK, so both parties are guilty of playing politics with SCOTUS nominees and similarly so. My view is that the Senate should have the hearings and decide to confirm or not. This is one of the important things that they are elected to do and this is another example of politicians not doing as they should which only furthers the habit. While I agree, the simple fact is that they don't have any Constitutional obligation to do so. Also, this isn't exactly uncommon. According to the White House, there's about 200 nominations Obama's made that have never had a hearing or been approved. And I know someone's going to say "But this is the Supreme Court, it's different!" No, it isn't different. The Constitution doesn't qualify any nominations by relative importance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted March 17, 2016 Share Posted March 17, 2016 Why bother wasting time and taxpayers' money holding hearings when the Senate is just following the advice of the Dems? Again, you reap what you sow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 17, 2016 Share Posted March 17, 2016 Why bother wasting time and taxpayers' money holding hearings when the Senate is just following the advice of the Dems? Again, you reap what you sow. Because that's kindergarten/playground logic. "You started it!" I'd like to say that we should aspire to better from our leadership...but we elected these idiots. The American people are reaping what they've sown. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted March 17, 2016 Share Posted March 17, 2016 Why bother wasting time and taxpayers' money holding hearings when the Senate is just following the advice of the Dems? Again, you reap what you sow. For that matter, why even have a Supreme Court or a Legislature. Just think of all the money we could save by eliminated 2/3 of the branches of Government and just let Obama govern by dictate. And those pesky elections get can expensive too Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted March 17, 2016 Share Posted March 17, 2016 THE ONION RUNS PHOTOSHOP OF A BLOOD-SPLATTERED MITCH McCONNELL HOLDING ALOFT MERRICK GARLAND’S SEVERED HEAD, while standing on the steps of the Senate. So just to confirm, Sarah Palin’s printer-registration marks clip art is the end of the world, but The Onion running an image of the Senate Majority Leader holding up the severed head of the president’s Supreme Court nominee? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯. Yet another reminder that as Andrew McCarthy noted earlier this month, “Trump Is the Effect, Not the Cause — A sick society breeds gutter politics.” And as Jonah Goldberg wrote in August of 2011, after the left’s self-imposed new civility timeout had ended and they were back to referring to the Tea Party as suicide vest-wearing members the “Hezbollah faction” of the GOP, “to hell with you people.” Here’s the link to the Onion, which I was tempted to withhold, given that Paul Krugman and three quarters of the left would have melted down if such an image came from the right. It’s also screencapped here, in case it’s deleted. Related: From last month, Ace on “What The Onion Looks Like Under the Ownership of a Hillary Backer Ed Driscoll: http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/229377/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted March 18, 2016 Share Posted March 18, 2016 (edited) tatatoothy. he meant aliens guy because he's thinking jeff goldblum. The aliens guy. no, that's the king of all media. americas judge. this is that guy... Because that's kindergarten/playground logic. "You started it!" I'd like to say that we should aspire to better from our leadership...but we elected these idiots. The American people are reaping what they've sown. we elect idiots, doesn't that make us idiots? my district just elected a woman to our nc senate who resigned as county commissioner for my county because she claimed she did not have time and it was more important to run her 3 fast food joints here in the town i live in. she cited her work to the community is just as valuable at the biscuit king as it was on the county commissioner board. Edited March 18, 2016 by Boyst62 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 18, 2016 Share Posted March 18, 2016 THE ONION RUNS PHOTOSHOP OF A BLOOD-SPLATTERED MITCH McCONNELL HOLDING ALOFT MERRICK GARLAND’S SEVERED HEAD, while standing on the steps of the Senate. So just to confirm, Sarah Palin’s printer-registration marks clip art is the end of the world, but The Onion running an image of the Senate Majority Leader holding up the severed head of the president’s Supreme Court nominee? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯. Yet another reminder that as Andrew McCarthy noted earlier this month, “Trump Is the Effect, Not the Cause — A sick society breeds gutter politics.” And as Jonah Goldberg wrote in August of 2011, after the left’s self-imposed new civility timeout had ended and they were back to referring to the Tea Party as suicide vest-wearing members the “Hezbollah faction” of the GOP, “to hell with you people.” Here’s the link to the Onion, which I was tempted to withhold, given that Paul Krugman and three quarters of the left would have melted down if such an image came from the right. It’s also screencapped here, in case it’s deleted. Related: From last month, Ace on “What The Onion Looks Like Under the Ownership of a Hillary Backer Ed Driscoll: http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/229377/ It's called SATIRE. Look it up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted March 18, 2016 Share Posted March 18, 2016 (edited) It's called SATIRE. Look it up. I'm well aware Tom. Commentary on media hypocrisy can refer to all types of Media. This isn't your father's Onion LOL........probably the silliest sentence I've typed in a while. . One side: NRO's Bench Memos: History of No Senate Hearing for Nominees http://bit.ly/1Z6cdQU and the other: Think again, this time after actually looking at the text and history of the #Constitution https://newrepublic.com/article/131700/republicans-block-obamas-supreme-court-pick-violating-constitution … Edited March 18, 2016 by B-Man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts