Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia dead at 79

[DanG 1]

Amused enough to perpetuate stupid rumors.

I suppose you're also going to claim that you never had doubts about Obama's birthplace, but were just amused about the whole thing?

- Dan G

[RonD1120 58]

DanG

Amused enough to perpetuate stupid rumors.

I suppose you're also going to claim that you never had doubts about Obama's birthplace, but were just amused about the whole thing?

Nope, I still have doubts about BHO's birthplace, his college transcripts, his academic achievements, his Christianity, his allegiance to the U.S.A., his agenda with respect to the stability of the middle east, just to name a few.

I was simply bringing to the SC what is buzzing on the media.

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[quade 3]

RonD1120

***So, you think someone murdered him with a pillow, but decided to leave it over his face as a cute little clue? Don't you think a murderer would be smart enough to tuck the pillow back under his head?

I don't think anything. I am just amused.

Oh man . . . too easy.

Quote

But, according to the Washington Post, the manager of the funeral home in El Paso that handled Mr Scalia's body said the justice's family insisted on not having an autopsy performed.

(Emphasis mine)
Source:
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-35588937

So . . . Ron . . . you think the family is in on the conspiracy?

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[normiss 620]

"his Christianity"


That's damn funny right there.

[GeorgiaDon 340]

Quote

Nowhere did I stipulate anything you suggest.

Not directly, but you supported McConnell's position that the President should not nominate anyone in the last year of the presidency.

Quote

But you know and I know, the Senate is under no Constitutional obligation to approve this nomination much less hold hearings or hold a vote in committee or bring it to the full Senate Floor for a vote.

And I pray that the next time you need a passport, a driver's license renewal, a business license, or any other government document the same "logic" is applied and your application is "sat on" for a few years, ideally until any opportunity you might have enjoyed from said document has long been lost.

Quote

McConnell is calling the shots from the Senate side. I'm sure you don't like it but that's how the Constitutional pickle squirts from time to time.

Republicans are showing their true colors: they are incapable of carrying out the most basic functions of government. They also are obviously contemptuous of the voting public they purport to serve. They lost the last two presidential elections, which indicates that they are incapable of convincing a majority of the voting public of the legitimacy of their ideas, so instead they use infantile procedural tactics to in effect shut down the government until they get their way. They remind me of when my kids were infants, when they didn't want to do something they would flop down on the floor and refuse to move, while screaming bloody murder. I think of that every time I see McConnell's face.

The whole Republican argument about an election year hiatus in nominations is without any basis either in law or in tradition. Their argument is a transparent lie. This is proven by the following quotes from the same Republicans who are now vowing to block any Obama nominee, from 2008 in the last year of the Bush administration (link):

"Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA):

“[The idea that July 2008 would trigger the] Thurmond Rule ­­– that’s just plain bunk. The reality is that the Senate has never stopped confirming judicial nominees during the last few months of a president’s term.”

Today, Grassley says that “The fact of the matter is that it’s been standard practice over the last nearly 80 years that Supreme Court nominees are not nominated and confirmed during a presidential election year… it only makes sense that we defer to the American people who will elect a new president to select the next Supreme Court Justice.”

Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-TN):

“There’s no excuse for not considering and voting upon a well­ qualified judicial nominee in the United States of America today… [J]ust because it’s a presidential election year is no excuse for us to take a vacation. And we’re here. We’re ready to go to work.”

Today, Alexander says that “it is reasonable to give the American people a voice by allowing the next president to fill this lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court.”

Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX):

“[N]ow is the perfect time for a new politics of judicial confirmation to arise where Republicans and Democrats work together to confirm qualified men and women to the federal bench. Now is the perfect time because, of course, we’re in a presidential election year and no one yet knows who the next president will be. What a unique opportunity to establish that regardless of the next president’s party, the nominees will be treated fairly and on the basis of their qualifications, and not on the basis of ancient political squabbles.”

Mitch McConnell (R-KY)

“I think it’s clear that there is no Thurmond Rule. And I think the facts demonstrate that.”

Today, McConnell is leading the charge for an expanded Thurmond Rule. “The American people should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice. Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new president,” he said, immediately after Scalia’s passing."

Perhaps this is a "does a bear shit in the woods" comment, but every one of those Republican "leaders" is a lying hypocrite, without a shred of the honor or decency one should expect of anyone in public office.

It is transparently clear that this whole matter is about the Republican ODS fetish, their desire to oppose anything and everything Obama says or does regardless of the cost to the American people. Since January of 2015 Republicans have blocked Obama from even being able to nominate judges for the federal Appellate Court; of 12 vacancies only one has been filled. By tradition, the President secures the approval of both senators in the state the court covers before sending a nomination to the Senate. Since January 2015 the Republicans have refused to endorse a single nominee, without any consideration of the qualifications of the nominee but explicitly to block Obama from putting judges on the bench. (link) In the meantime over 20 courts where Republicans have blocked vacancies from being filled have declared judicial emergencies: cases are accumulating faster than they can be cleared, and as a result litigants are waiting years for their day in court and, in some instances, cases are being dismissed because the delay violates defendants right to a trial within a reasonable time frame. Republicans are unmoved, however, preferring that people wait years for their day in court (or never get their day in court) rather than allow Obama a judicial appointment.

Republicans are wrapping themselves in a turd blanket when they invoke a mythical "Thurmond rule", as it is rooted in Strom Thurmond, a notorious segregationist, blocking Lyndon Johnson's nomination of Abe Fortas to be Chief Justice, in order to protest passage of the Civil Rights Act.

Given that Republicans have employed procedural tactics to block Obama from nominating people to fill not only Supreme Court vacancies, but vacancies at all other Federal courts, we can ask what would happen if Clinton or Sanders were to win the presidency? There is no reason to believe they would not use the same tactics to block any nomination from any Democrat President. I have no doubt they would be happy to see Scalias position go unfilled for years, even decades, if that's what it takes to get some Bork clone on the bench.

Quote

Let me ask you this question I asked another here. If this situation were in complete reverse, you think a Democratic Senate Majority would react differently to a conservative Republican President sending up a SCOTUS nominee with less than a year to the end of term?

What a stupid question. Is that how you think the country should be run, like a bunch of imbecilic third graders going "I know you are but what am I"?

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)

[kallend 1,621]

jakee

Quote

I'd still like to know the requirements though. If people want to abuse the term "qualifications" incorrectly, then at least knowing the true baseline let's us understand how the writer is using it.

I'm pretty sure they have to be alive and human, for issues of practicality if nothing else.

A strict Constitutionalist like Scalia would argue that point, since neither condition is specified in the Constitution.

Because ... original intent

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Boomerdog 0]

Quote

Not directly, but you supported McConnell's position that the President should not nominate anyone in the last year of the presidency.

You DAMN right I support McConnell's decision

Quote

And I pray that the next time you need a passport, a driver's license renewal, a business license, or any other government document the same "logic" is applied and your application is "sat on" for a few years, ideally until any opportunity you might have enjoyed from said document has long been lost.

Passports work much quicker than that. Driver's license is done on line. Haven't applied for a business license yet. But I am thinking about it having a small business once I do officially retire from the rat race. I'll let you know how it goes.

The rest of your screed is your opinion and like assholes, everybody's got one.

[rushmc 18]

Republicans are just doing what Schumer suggested...

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[JerryBaumchen 1,047]

Hi rush,

Quote

Republicans are just doing what Schumer suggested...

And Schumer was as wrong then as the Republicans are now.

Something about if the shoe fits . . .

Jerry Baumchen

PS) The unofficial definition of lame duck president is, and always has been, after his successor has been determined; i.e., in Nov of this year; not now.

[billvon 2,384]

>Haven't applied for a business license yet.

They should probably sit on the application until the next mayor comes into office. He might change things. Why not wait until the people vote for a mayor? What's the hurry?

[muff528 3]

I seem to remember that the term "lame duck" referred to a President who had been defeated and was simply finishing out his term between the election and the inauguration of his successor. The reasoning was that his defeat implied a loss of popular support. There may or may not be a "lame duck" period at the end of a second term, depending on the political climate. I think the term has been used more recently (past 50 years or so) in a tactical sense by the opposing party to describe any President's final year or months of service.

[quade 3]

muff528

I seem to remember that the term "lame duck" referred to a President who had been defeated and was simply finishing out his term between the election and the inauguration of his successor. The reasoning was that his defeat implied a loss of popular support. There may or may not be a "lame duck" period at the end of a second term, depending on the political climate. I think the term has been used more recently (past 50 years or so) in a tactical sense by the opposing party to describe any President's final year or months of service.

Correct.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lame_duck_(politics)#United_States

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[muff528 3]

Just a random memory from 8th grade Civics class.

[ryoder 1,381]

muff528

Just a random memory from 8th grade Civics class.

So you made the Wikipedia edit just before you posted?
Smart move.

"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

[Boomerdog 0]

As if government is so so so so vital in you lives?
Who are you guys?
Skydivers or pudknockers?

[kallend 1,621]

Boomerdog

You DAMN right I support McConnell's decision

In 2005 McConnell said "The Republican conference intends to restore the principle that, regardless of party, any President's judicial nominees, after full debate, deserve a simple up-or-down vote."

I certainly agree with him on that.

He went on to say "The Frist fairness rule guarantees up-or-down votes for every circuit court or Supreme Court nomination, regardless of which party controls the Senate or the White House. It guarantees every president that their judicial nominees will get through committee and get a vote on the Senate floor."

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[JerryBaumchen 1,047]

Hi muff,

Quote

Just a random memory from 8th grade Civics class.

And good on your.

I found 'my' definition on Politico yesterday; however, now that I think more about it, you are correct. It is a Prez who has been defeated.

A litle civic lesson for everyone; doesn't get much better than that.

Jerry Baumchen

[GeorgiaDon 340]

Quote

The rest of your screed is your opinion and like assholes, everybody's got one.

Sure, except your opinion is inflamed and oozing santorum.

Republican flip-flopping on the "Thurmond rule" is not opinion, it is a matter of easily verified fact. For the record, Democrats have also played both sides of the issue, and that is also contemptible.

The segregationist history of the "Thurmond rule" is also easily verified, not opinion. That the "Thurmond rule" (never a real rule or law) initially applied to the last few months before the election, and has now been extended by Republicans to fully two years, is also a matter of verifiable fact.

Republican obstruction of judicial appointments at all levels since they gained control of the Senate is fact, not opinion.

That these actions mark Republican politicians as vindictive children, eminently unsuited to any role in leading the country, is indeed my opinion. I fully expect a majority of Americans are similarly disgusted with their naked contempt for the jobs to which they were elected, which will be reflected in the outcome of the November election. In my opinion of course.

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)

[muff528 3]

ryoder

*** Just a random memory from 8th grade Civics class.

So you made the Wikipedia edit just before you posted?
Smart move.




Also, I don't think there's anything that says a lame duck President cannot carry out any of his official duties, including appointments, at any time during his presidency. Nor is there anything that says that any of his appointments must be confirmed by the Senate. There doesn't even have to be 9 Justices on the Court.

[billvon 2,384]

>As if government is so so so so vital in you lives?

Waitaminute. You were the one who was thinking you wanted to get a business license from the government. Why not just be your own man instead of running to the government to get a license you apparently don't need? They should definitely sit on that application; no need for you to get it. After all, government isn't vital to YOUR life.

Unless you're a pudknocker, that is.

[rehmwa 2]

muff528

Also, I don't think there's anything that says a lame duck President cannot carry out any of his official duties, including appointments, at any time during his presidency. Nor is there anything that says that any of his appointments must be confirmed by the Senate. There doesn't even have to be 9 Justices on the Court.

^^^^^ this - their roles are defined and they need to do their jobs

The whole thing is a big goof - with the sides trying to out strawman themselves while the body is still warm. Both sides need to do their jobs - what the bitching is about is that both sides are whining that these guys doing their jobs won't result in what some people desperately want.....a very biased and unprofessional activist judge that votes in an unbiased way...no, the other way,,.....no, MY way,,,....etc etc etc

Exec - It's not a 'right', but it is a 'duty' of the president to come up with nominations. he should do it, without fanfare, timely, and without bitching about some hypothetical response of the Senate.

etc - Politicians that aren't Senators - either party - shut up.

Legis - It's not a 'right', but it is a 'duty' of the Senate to review and give a thumbs up or down on any nominations put forth. It's their duty also to advise the exec - as it is his duty to listen to the advice. (Advice is not a 'warning shot', listening is not 'ignoring input and then whining to the press') they should do their jobs. If it takes a week, great, if it takes months, great. If it pushes to the next administration - well, there are risks to both teams if that happens but that is also a legal scenario too. That's politics and both sides do it.


just the legislative and executive branches doing their jobs is good. using the scenario as a bunch of crappy speech material? painful and zero value added

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[billvon 2,384]

> Both sides need to do their jobs . . . .

That's the one thing I can pretty much guarantee WON'T happen.

[kallend 1,621]

Blame Spock.

harddawn.com/nimoy-and-obama-killed-scalia/

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[jclalor 12]

Perhaps if the GOP really wanted a SCOTUS appontment in 2016, they should have won the 2012 presidential election.

[rehmwa 2]

jclalor

Perhaps if the GOP really wanted a SCOTUS appontment in 2016, they should have won the 2012 presidential election.

absolutely - in the same vein, if they wanted it rubber stamped, the public should have voted in a hardcore Democrat Senate in 2014

legis and exec just need to follow the process as they are obligated to do - what happens happens.

in the meantime - strawmen and chest puffing on both sides will accomplish little other than entertain us

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants