ryoder 1,390 #26 February 14, 2016 From Slashdot: Perhaps the biggest "fuck you" Obama could give to the GOP (if McConnell lets this go until the July recess) is to put himself on the bench via recess appointment and resign the Presidency in the same executive order. "There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 622 #27 February 14, 2016 I cannot understand the insistence of the GOP to NOT do their jobs. I can only wish that meant something to their supporters, but it won't. Most people get fired for not doing their job. Oh if only. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Stumpy 256 #28 February 14, 2016 ryoder From Slashdot: Perhaps the biggest "fuck you" Obama could give to the GOP (if McConnell lets this go until the July recess) is to put himself on the bench via recess appointment and resign the Presidency in the same executive order. Would that even be possible?Never try to eat more than you can lift Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 622 #29 February 14, 2016 To Bork himself? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Boomerdog 0 #30 February 14, 2016 QuoteI cannot understand the insistence of the GOP to NOT do their jobs. I can only wish that meant something to their supporters, but it won't. Most people get fired for not doing their job. Oh if only. No...it's the job YOU want him to do. McConnell is UNDER no Constitutional (which also means LEGAL) obligation to bring any Obama nominee to SCOTUS for a vote. So he's doing his job...it's just that YOU (and of course a few others around here) just don't like it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites normiss 622 #31 February 14, 2016 It's zero to do with what I might want. It's for the better of the country and those with legal cases pending. Leaving the SC in limbo for a year or more is irresponsible. Sure would be amazing to see us work together as a nation instead of hating ourselves and fighting to the point of accomplishing zero. It foolishly insane and entirely unnecessary and it hurts us all. I'm over the republican party holding the entire country hostage in an attempt to promote their message of hate and division. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rushmc 18 #32 February 14, 2016 billvon >Mitch McConnell: >“The American people should have a voice in the selection of their next >Supreme Court Justice," he said in a statement. "Therefore, this vacancy should >not be filled until we have a new President.” Someone else who thinks the Constitution is an annoying triviality to be ignored when it gets in the way of what they want. Now you claim you care"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rushmc 18 #33 February 14, 2016 All the Senate has to do is vote no Obama can send in another one then That is the role of the Senate"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rushmc 18 #34 February 14, 2016 BoomerdogQuoteI cannot understand the insistence of the GOP to NOT do their jobs. I can only wish that meant something to their supporters, but it won't. Most people get fired for not doing their job. Oh if only. No...it's the job YOU want him to do. McConnell is UNDER no Constitutional (which also means LEGAL) obligation to bring any Obama nominee to SCOTUS for a vote. So he's doing his job...it's just that YOU (and of course a few others around here) just don't like it. The other thing the Senate can do is say no they are under no obligation to approve I say they only should have an up or down vote"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Boomerdog 0 #35 February 14, 2016 Oh so it was OK when Sen Patrick Leahy held up Bush 43 nominations to some of the Federal Circuit Courts and the D.C. Court of Appeals back in 2001 - 2003? It's zero to do with what you might want...then why did you make the post in the first place...don't insult us with you think is higher minded intellect when it really boils down to partisan bullshit. I'll tell you up front I'm a conservative partisan. Sure would be amazing if we could work together as a nation. Of that we can agree but right now each side sees themselves as the children of light and the other as the children of darkness. When will that end I don't know but for now, that's the way it is. QuoteI'm over the republican party holding the entire country hostage in an attempt to promote their message of hate and division. As if your particular brand of politics is harmonious and unifying? Oh gawd...spare me. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites ryoder 1,390 #36 February 14, 2016 From "The Onion": "Justice Scalia Dead Following 30-Year Battle With Social Progress" "There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites normiss 622 #37 February 14, 2016 I wasn't discussing one in the past that I would also disagree with. The partisan bullshit is my complaint as well, as I said in the previous post. I'm pretty much middle of the road with a few opinions of certain issues on both sides of the middle. Like most folks are actually. I too look forward to the end of political parties. Again, what "brand" of politics is it that I have??? I'm simply asking that our elected officials work TOGETHER for the COUNTRY. Not you, not me, not someone lining their pockets, nor the right or left, and especially not the Faketriots. US, us, you, me, women, refugees, and the rest of the assholes too. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites gowlerk 1,915 #38 February 14, 2016 rushmcAll the Senate has to do is vote no Obama can send in another one then That is the role of the Senate That is correct. But the Senators will have answer to the people. One third of them this year. So if they do that, they better be able to sell their reason.Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites wmw999 2,125 #39 February 14, 2016 I agree with this. I also hope that IF Obama were to nominate someone of sufficient stature, he or she gets an honest evaluation. Obviously no one who Obama nominates will be ideal for the conservatives. Equally obviously no one that is ideal for the Tea Party is likely to appeal to anyone in the middle or left. All those people, right, left, and in between are still Americans, and deserve a justice who understands and respects both the words of the constitution, and the people it applies to. That second not because there should be different rulings for different people, but because there shouldn't. The US judiciary has a history of seeing people through social, not legal, glasses. Part of the SC's job is to remove those glasses. Wendy P.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites JerryBaumchen 1,050 #40 February 14, 2016 Hi Wendy, QuoteThat second not because there should be different rulings for different people, but because there shouldn't. It would seem that the Republican Party disagrees with you: http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/republicans-reject-comparisons-reagan-s-late-term-scotus-nominee-n518696 Jerry Baumchen Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 1,634 #41 February 14, 2016 BoomerdogQuoteI cannot understand the insistence of the GOP to NOT do their jobs. I can only wish that meant something to their supporters, but it won't. Most people get fired for not doing their job. Oh if only. No...it's the job YOU want him to do. McConnell is UNDER no Constitutional (which also means LEGAL) obligation to bring any Obama nominee to SCOTUS for a vote. So he's doing his job...it's just that YOU (and of course a few others around here) just don't like it. As the hymn says: "God moves in mysterious ways; His wonders to perform". And apparently the GOP doesn't like it.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites normiss 622 #42 February 14, 2016 He's gonna be pretty pissed if his believers are forced birth control and day after pills. Maybe the babies saved offset in Texas will keep them happy though. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Boomerdog 0 #43 February 15, 2016 QuoteAs the hymn says: "God moves in mysterious ways; His wonders to perform". And apparently the GOP doesn't like it. Hmmm...am I correct in remembering that you are either atheist or agnostic and yet you invoke God here? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Boomerdog 0 #44 February 15, 2016 Well...the sad part of this is that THERE ARE two distinct visions of what this country ought to look like in the future and what we ought to be working to in order to secure that futureneither side is giving an inch. We are that polarized. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Boomerdog 0 #45 February 15, 2016 Lyndon Johnson tried to nominate Associate Justice Abe Fortas as Chief Justice and name a new Justice to replace him in 1968, his final year in office. The nominations came as a result of Chief Justice Earl Warren’s retirement from the Court. Johnson’s push failed, however, even though the Senate was controlled by Democrats. The next Chief Justice appointment did not occur until the Nixon administration with Nixon nominating Warren Burger to be Chief Justice. This is not to say that history is a precedent to be respected in the present. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 1,634 #46 February 15, 2016 normiss He's gonna be pretty pissed if his believers are forced birth control and day after pills. Maybe the babies saved offset in Texas will keep them happy though. I just re-read Article 2 Section 2 of the US Constitution. I couldn't find anything in there saying that the president can't make appointments during the final 25% of his (or her) term of office.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites ryoder 1,390 #47 February 15, 2016 kallend ***He's gonna be pretty pissed if his believers are forced birth control and day after pills. Maybe the babies saved offset in Texas will keep them happy though. I just re-read Article 2 Section 2 of the US Constitution. I couldn't find anything in there saying that the president can't make appointments during the final 25% of his (or her) term of office. I'm sure it's in there somewhere...in the same section that prohibits senators from submitting legislation (or voting on it) during their last 18 months in office."There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites GeorgiaDon 340 #48 February 15, 2016 QuoteWell...the sad part of this is that THERE ARE two distinct visions of what this country ought to look like in the future...True. One side believes each individual should be free to choose their religious beliefs, and the other seeks to force us all to live by their narrow interpretation of a particular sect of Christianity. Which do you think best matches the letter and spirit of the First Amendment? I do so hope that the next time you really need something important done, the people you need to act decide to drag their feet for a couple of years. Don_____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites JerryBaumchen 1,050 #49 February 15, 2016 Hi Boomer, Quotehis final year in office I do not know if you were around back then; I was. It had nothing to do with Johnson's last year in office. It was this: ' . . . at least in part due to ethics problems . . .' https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abe_Fortas Jerry Baumchen Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites turtlespeed 212 #50 February 15, 2016 ryoder *** Well, if Thomas follows Scalia's lead as he always has done in the past, it will be 4-3. Fark: "Scalia dies on Texas hunting trip. Dick Cheney's current whereabouts unknown." Andy Rooney Voice: Have you ever wondered why so many liberals actually cheer someone's death. It seems to me that they may be disengenuous. SO glad they represent the party of tolerance and feelings. Quote God works in mysterious ways. Thank you, Lord!!!! I wonder who Speaker's Corner's favorite POTUS has in the queue for nomination to replace a fallen member of SCOTUS? SlySlySlySlySlySlySly The fact that the paid for politicians will likely game the rules is what we get for allowing money to infest how politicians operate. I see that example more and more from the left. I almost begin to expect it from anyone that touts themselves as a true liberal.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next Page 2 of 8 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
normiss 622 #31 February 14, 2016 It's zero to do with what I might want. It's for the better of the country and those with legal cases pending. Leaving the SC in limbo for a year or more is irresponsible. Sure would be amazing to see us work together as a nation instead of hating ourselves and fighting to the point of accomplishing zero. It foolishly insane and entirely unnecessary and it hurts us all. I'm over the republican party holding the entire country hostage in an attempt to promote their message of hate and division. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #32 February 14, 2016 billvon >Mitch McConnell: >“The American people should have a voice in the selection of their next >Supreme Court Justice," he said in a statement. "Therefore, this vacancy should >not be filled until we have a new President.” Someone else who thinks the Constitution is an annoying triviality to be ignored when it gets in the way of what they want. Now you claim you care"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #33 February 14, 2016 All the Senate has to do is vote no Obama can send in another one then That is the role of the Senate"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #34 February 14, 2016 BoomerdogQuoteI cannot understand the insistence of the GOP to NOT do their jobs. I can only wish that meant something to their supporters, but it won't. Most people get fired for not doing their job. Oh if only. No...it's the job YOU want him to do. McConnell is UNDER no Constitutional (which also means LEGAL) obligation to bring any Obama nominee to SCOTUS for a vote. So he's doing his job...it's just that YOU (and of course a few others around here) just don't like it. The other thing the Senate can do is say no they are under no obligation to approve I say they only should have an up or down vote"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Boomerdog 0 #35 February 14, 2016 Oh so it was OK when Sen Patrick Leahy held up Bush 43 nominations to some of the Federal Circuit Courts and the D.C. Court of Appeals back in 2001 - 2003? It's zero to do with what you might want...then why did you make the post in the first place...don't insult us with you think is higher minded intellect when it really boils down to partisan bullshit. I'll tell you up front I'm a conservative partisan. Sure would be amazing if we could work together as a nation. Of that we can agree but right now each side sees themselves as the children of light and the other as the children of darkness. When will that end I don't know but for now, that's the way it is. QuoteI'm over the republican party holding the entire country hostage in an attempt to promote their message of hate and division. As if your particular brand of politics is harmonious and unifying? Oh gawd...spare me. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites ryoder 1,390 #36 February 14, 2016 From "The Onion": "Justice Scalia Dead Following 30-Year Battle With Social Progress" "There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites normiss 622 #37 February 14, 2016 I wasn't discussing one in the past that I would also disagree with. The partisan bullshit is my complaint as well, as I said in the previous post. I'm pretty much middle of the road with a few opinions of certain issues on both sides of the middle. Like most folks are actually. I too look forward to the end of political parties. Again, what "brand" of politics is it that I have??? I'm simply asking that our elected officials work TOGETHER for the COUNTRY. Not you, not me, not someone lining their pockets, nor the right or left, and especially not the Faketriots. US, us, you, me, women, refugees, and the rest of the assholes too. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites gowlerk 1,915 #38 February 14, 2016 rushmcAll the Senate has to do is vote no Obama can send in another one then That is the role of the Senate That is correct. But the Senators will have answer to the people. One third of them this year. So if they do that, they better be able to sell their reason.Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites wmw999 2,125 #39 February 14, 2016 I agree with this. I also hope that IF Obama were to nominate someone of sufficient stature, he or she gets an honest evaluation. Obviously no one who Obama nominates will be ideal for the conservatives. Equally obviously no one that is ideal for the Tea Party is likely to appeal to anyone in the middle or left. All those people, right, left, and in between are still Americans, and deserve a justice who understands and respects both the words of the constitution, and the people it applies to. That second not because there should be different rulings for different people, but because there shouldn't. The US judiciary has a history of seeing people through social, not legal, glasses. Part of the SC's job is to remove those glasses. Wendy P.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites JerryBaumchen 1,050 #40 February 14, 2016 Hi Wendy, QuoteThat second not because there should be different rulings for different people, but because there shouldn't. It would seem that the Republican Party disagrees with you: http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/republicans-reject-comparisons-reagan-s-late-term-scotus-nominee-n518696 Jerry Baumchen Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 1,634 #41 February 14, 2016 BoomerdogQuoteI cannot understand the insistence of the GOP to NOT do their jobs. I can only wish that meant something to their supporters, but it won't. Most people get fired for not doing their job. Oh if only. No...it's the job YOU want him to do. McConnell is UNDER no Constitutional (which also means LEGAL) obligation to bring any Obama nominee to SCOTUS for a vote. So he's doing his job...it's just that YOU (and of course a few others around here) just don't like it. As the hymn says: "God moves in mysterious ways; His wonders to perform". And apparently the GOP doesn't like it.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites normiss 622 #42 February 14, 2016 He's gonna be pretty pissed if his believers are forced birth control and day after pills. Maybe the babies saved offset in Texas will keep them happy though. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Boomerdog 0 #43 February 15, 2016 QuoteAs the hymn says: "God moves in mysterious ways; His wonders to perform". And apparently the GOP doesn't like it. Hmmm...am I correct in remembering that you are either atheist or agnostic and yet you invoke God here? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Boomerdog 0 #44 February 15, 2016 Well...the sad part of this is that THERE ARE two distinct visions of what this country ought to look like in the future and what we ought to be working to in order to secure that futureneither side is giving an inch. We are that polarized. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Boomerdog 0 #45 February 15, 2016 Lyndon Johnson tried to nominate Associate Justice Abe Fortas as Chief Justice and name a new Justice to replace him in 1968, his final year in office. The nominations came as a result of Chief Justice Earl Warren’s retirement from the Court. Johnson’s push failed, however, even though the Senate was controlled by Democrats. The next Chief Justice appointment did not occur until the Nixon administration with Nixon nominating Warren Burger to be Chief Justice. This is not to say that history is a precedent to be respected in the present. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 1,634 #46 February 15, 2016 normiss He's gonna be pretty pissed if his believers are forced birth control and day after pills. Maybe the babies saved offset in Texas will keep them happy though. I just re-read Article 2 Section 2 of the US Constitution. I couldn't find anything in there saying that the president can't make appointments during the final 25% of his (or her) term of office.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites ryoder 1,390 #47 February 15, 2016 kallend ***He's gonna be pretty pissed if his believers are forced birth control and day after pills. Maybe the babies saved offset in Texas will keep them happy though. I just re-read Article 2 Section 2 of the US Constitution. I couldn't find anything in there saying that the president can't make appointments during the final 25% of his (or her) term of office. I'm sure it's in there somewhere...in the same section that prohibits senators from submitting legislation (or voting on it) during their last 18 months in office."There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites GeorgiaDon 340 #48 February 15, 2016 QuoteWell...the sad part of this is that THERE ARE two distinct visions of what this country ought to look like in the future...True. One side believes each individual should be free to choose their religious beliefs, and the other seeks to force us all to live by their narrow interpretation of a particular sect of Christianity. Which do you think best matches the letter and spirit of the First Amendment? I do so hope that the next time you really need something important done, the people you need to act decide to drag their feet for a couple of years. Don_____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites JerryBaumchen 1,050 #49 February 15, 2016 Hi Boomer, Quotehis final year in office I do not know if you were around back then; I was. It had nothing to do with Johnson's last year in office. It was this: ' . . . at least in part due to ethics problems . . .' https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abe_Fortas Jerry Baumchen Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites turtlespeed 212 #50 February 15, 2016 ryoder *** Well, if Thomas follows Scalia's lead as he always has done in the past, it will be 4-3. Fark: "Scalia dies on Texas hunting trip. Dick Cheney's current whereabouts unknown." Andy Rooney Voice: Have you ever wondered why so many liberals actually cheer someone's death. It seems to me that they may be disengenuous. SO glad they represent the party of tolerance and feelings. Quote God works in mysterious ways. Thank you, Lord!!!! I wonder who Speaker's Corner's favorite POTUS has in the queue for nomination to replace a fallen member of SCOTUS? SlySlySlySlySlySlySly The fact that the paid for politicians will likely game the rules is what we get for allowing money to infest how politicians operate. I see that example more and more from the left. I almost begin to expect it from anyone that touts themselves as a true liberal.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next Page 2 of 8 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
Boomerdog 0 #35 February 14, 2016 Oh so it was OK when Sen Patrick Leahy held up Bush 43 nominations to some of the Federal Circuit Courts and the D.C. Court of Appeals back in 2001 - 2003? It's zero to do with what you might want...then why did you make the post in the first place...don't insult us with you think is higher minded intellect when it really boils down to partisan bullshit. I'll tell you up front I'm a conservative partisan. Sure would be amazing if we could work together as a nation. Of that we can agree but right now each side sees themselves as the children of light and the other as the children of darkness. When will that end I don't know but for now, that's the way it is. QuoteI'm over the republican party holding the entire country hostage in an attempt to promote their message of hate and division. As if your particular brand of politics is harmonious and unifying? Oh gawd...spare me. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ryoder 1,390 #36 February 14, 2016 From "The Onion": "Justice Scalia Dead Following 30-Year Battle With Social Progress" "There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 622 #37 February 14, 2016 I wasn't discussing one in the past that I would also disagree with. The partisan bullshit is my complaint as well, as I said in the previous post. I'm pretty much middle of the road with a few opinions of certain issues on both sides of the middle. Like most folks are actually. I too look forward to the end of political parties. Again, what "brand" of politics is it that I have??? I'm simply asking that our elected officials work TOGETHER for the COUNTRY. Not you, not me, not someone lining their pockets, nor the right or left, and especially not the Faketriots. US, us, you, me, women, refugees, and the rest of the assholes too. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gowlerk 1,915 #38 February 14, 2016 rushmcAll the Senate has to do is vote no Obama can send in another one then That is the role of the Senate That is correct. But the Senators will have answer to the people. One third of them this year. So if they do that, they better be able to sell their reason.Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,125 #39 February 14, 2016 I agree with this. I also hope that IF Obama were to nominate someone of sufficient stature, he or she gets an honest evaluation. Obviously no one who Obama nominates will be ideal for the conservatives. Equally obviously no one that is ideal for the Tea Party is likely to appeal to anyone in the middle or left. All those people, right, left, and in between are still Americans, and deserve a justice who understands and respects both the words of the constitution, and the people it applies to. That second not because there should be different rulings for different people, but because there shouldn't. The US judiciary has a history of seeing people through social, not legal, glasses. Part of the SC's job is to remove those glasses. Wendy P.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JerryBaumchen 1,050 #40 February 14, 2016 Hi Wendy, QuoteThat second not because there should be different rulings for different people, but because there shouldn't. It would seem that the Republican Party disagrees with you: http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/republicans-reject-comparisons-reagan-s-late-term-scotus-nominee-n518696 Jerry Baumchen Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,634 #41 February 14, 2016 BoomerdogQuoteI cannot understand the insistence of the GOP to NOT do their jobs. I can only wish that meant something to their supporters, but it won't. Most people get fired for not doing their job. Oh if only. No...it's the job YOU want him to do. McConnell is UNDER no Constitutional (which also means LEGAL) obligation to bring any Obama nominee to SCOTUS for a vote. So he's doing his job...it's just that YOU (and of course a few others around here) just don't like it. As the hymn says: "God moves in mysterious ways; His wonders to perform". And apparently the GOP doesn't like it.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites normiss 622 #42 February 14, 2016 He's gonna be pretty pissed if his believers are forced birth control and day after pills. Maybe the babies saved offset in Texas will keep them happy though. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Boomerdog 0 #43 February 15, 2016 QuoteAs the hymn says: "God moves in mysterious ways; His wonders to perform". And apparently the GOP doesn't like it. Hmmm...am I correct in remembering that you are either atheist or agnostic and yet you invoke God here? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Boomerdog 0 #44 February 15, 2016 Well...the sad part of this is that THERE ARE two distinct visions of what this country ought to look like in the future and what we ought to be working to in order to secure that futureneither side is giving an inch. We are that polarized. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Boomerdog 0 #45 February 15, 2016 Lyndon Johnson tried to nominate Associate Justice Abe Fortas as Chief Justice and name a new Justice to replace him in 1968, his final year in office. The nominations came as a result of Chief Justice Earl Warren’s retirement from the Court. Johnson’s push failed, however, even though the Senate was controlled by Democrats. The next Chief Justice appointment did not occur until the Nixon administration with Nixon nominating Warren Burger to be Chief Justice. This is not to say that history is a precedent to be respected in the present. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 1,634 #46 February 15, 2016 normiss He's gonna be pretty pissed if his believers are forced birth control and day after pills. Maybe the babies saved offset in Texas will keep them happy though. I just re-read Article 2 Section 2 of the US Constitution. I couldn't find anything in there saying that the president can't make appointments during the final 25% of his (or her) term of office.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites ryoder 1,390 #47 February 15, 2016 kallend ***He's gonna be pretty pissed if his believers are forced birth control and day after pills. Maybe the babies saved offset in Texas will keep them happy though. I just re-read Article 2 Section 2 of the US Constitution. I couldn't find anything in there saying that the president can't make appointments during the final 25% of his (or her) term of office. I'm sure it's in there somewhere...in the same section that prohibits senators from submitting legislation (or voting on it) during their last 18 months in office."There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites GeorgiaDon 340 #48 February 15, 2016 QuoteWell...the sad part of this is that THERE ARE two distinct visions of what this country ought to look like in the future...True. One side believes each individual should be free to choose their religious beliefs, and the other seeks to force us all to live by their narrow interpretation of a particular sect of Christianity. Which do you think best matches the letter and spirit of the First Amendment? I do so hope that the next time you really need something important done, the people you need to act decide to drag their feet for a couple of years. Don_____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites JerryBaumchen 1,050 #49 February 15, 2016 Hi Boomer, Quotehis final year in office I do not know if you were around back then; I was. It had nothing to do with Johnson's last year in office. It was this: ' . . . at least in part due to ethics problems . . .' https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abe_Fortas Jerry Baumchen Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites turtlespeed 212 #50 February 15, 2016 ryoder *** Well, if Thomas follows Scalia's lead as he always has done in the past, it will be 4-3. Fark: "Scalia dies on Texas hunting trip. Dick Cheney's current whereabouts unknown." Andy Rooney Voice: Have you ever wondered why so many liberals actually cheer someone's death. It seems to me that they may be disengenuous. SO glad they represent the party of tolerance and feelings. Quote God works in mysterious ways. Thank you, Lord!!!! I wonder who Speaker's Corner's favorite POTUS has in the queue for nomination to replace a fallen member of SCOTUS? SlySlySlySlySlySlySly The fact that the paid for politicians will likely game the rules is what we get for allowing money to infest how politicians operate. I see that example more and more from the left. I almost begin to expect it from anyone that touts themselves as a true liberal.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next Page 2 of 8 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
normiss 622 #42 February 14, 2016 He's gonna be pretty pissed if his believers are forced birth control and day after pills. Maybe the babies saved offset in Texas will keep them happy though. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Boomerdog 0 #43 February 15, 2016 QuoteAs the hymn says: "God moves in mysterious ways; His wonders to perform". And apparently the GOP doesn't like it. Hmmm...am I correct in remembering that you are either atheist or agnostic and yet you invoke God here? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Boomerdog 0 #44 February 15, 2016 Well...the sad part of this is that THERE ARE two distinct visions of what this country ought to look like in the future and what we ought to be working to in order to secure that futureneither side is giving an inch. We are that polarized. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Boomerdog 0 #45 February 15, 2016 Lyndon Johnson tried to nominate Associate Justice Abe Fortas as Chief Justice and name a new Justice to replace him in 1968, his final year in office. The nominations came as a result of Chief Justice Earl Warren’s retirement from the Court. Johnson’s push failed, however, even though the Senate was controlled by Democrats. The next Chief Justice appointment did not occur until the Nixon administration with Nixon nominating Warren Burger to be Chief Justice. This is not to say that history is a precedent to be respected in the present. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,634 #46 February 15, 2016 normiss He's gonna be pretty pissed if his believers are forced birth control and day after pills. Maybe the babies saved offset in Texas will keep them happy though. I just re-read Article 2 Section 2 of the US Constitution. I couldn't find anything in there saying that the president can't make appointments during the final 25% of his (or her) term of office.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ryoder 1,390 #47 February 15, 2016 kallend ***He's gonna be pretty pissed if his believers are forced birth control and day after pills. Maybe the babies saved offset in Texas will keep them happy though. I just re-read Article 2 Section 2 of the US Constitution. I couldn't find anything in there saying that the president can't make appointments during the final 25% of his (or her) term of office. I'm sure it's in there somewhere...in the same section that prohibits senators from submitting legislation (or voting on it) during their last 18 months in office."There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GeorgiaDon 340 #48 February 15, 2016 QuoteWell...the sad part of this is that THERE ARE two distinct visions of what this country ought to look like in the future...True. One side believes each individual should be free to choose their religious beliefs, and the other seeks to force us all to live by their narrow interpretation of a particular sect of Christianity. Which do you think best matches the letter and spirit of the First Amendment? I do so hope that the next time you really need something important done, the people you need to act decide to drag their feet for a couple of years. Don_____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JerryBaumchen 1,050 #49 February 15, 2016 Hi Boomer, Quotehis final year in office I do not know if you were around back then; I was. It had nothing to do with Johnson's last year in office. It was this: ' . . . at least in part due to ethics problems . . .' https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abe_Fortas Jerry Baumchen Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 212 #50 February 15, 2016 ryoder *** Well, if Thomas follows Scalia's lead as he always has done in the past, it will be 4-3. Fark: "Scalia dies on Texas hunting trip. Dick Cheney's current whereabouts unknown." Andy Rooney Voice: Have you ever wondered why so many liberals actually cheer someone's death. It seems to me that they may be disengenuous. SO glad they represent the party of tolerance and feelings. Quote God works in mysterious ways. Thank you, Lord!!!! I wonder who Speaker's Corner's favorite POTUS has in the queue for nomination to replace a fallen member of SCOTUS? SlySlySlySlySlySlySly The fact that the paid for politicians will likely game the rules is what we get for allowing money to infest how politicians operate. I see that example more and more from the left. I almost begin to expect it from anyone that touts themselves as a true liberal.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
