Bush AG: "No question" Obama has "obligation" to fill the seat

[LeftofLeft]

He does.

And the Senate majority has an obligation - and a right - to its constituents to block unacceptable nominees,

So long as they act with good intentions. As it stands, they are saying they will block anyone just cause it's obama .

And these are the same people who claim obama doesn't follow the constitution .

Keeping with the Schumer model..... show us the Liberal voice in 2007 saying not to block anyone because it was Bush and to stand on principle and process? You Liberals are determine to have it cut both ways yet are simply showing US once again how full of shit you are.

Hmm, was there a vote, yes or no?

I've asked this several times, and they always run away...

It is irrelevant. What matters is the position.

 

[Timmy]

Conservatives have tied up Obamas nominations since day one . How many fed judge postions have they refused to fill? Quit acting like its about Obamas last year .

 

[80zephyr]

Conservatives have tied up Obamas nominations since day one . How many fed judge postions have they refused to fill? Quit acting like its about Obamas last year .

Same thing the Dems did with Bush. Did you complain then?

Mark

 

[g5000]

He does.

And the Senate majority has an obligation - and a right - to its constituents to block unacceptable nominees,

Yes, but preemptively stating that NO nominee will be consented to is political assholery.

 

[Fueri]

I see no reason why he shouldn't or wouldn't appoint someone.

The debate on that makes no sense to me at all, aside from typical political bickering.

What happens after that may or may not depend on who that person is.

If it's nothing but another partisan hack like Sotomayor, then the pubs will likely block it. If it's more of a moderate, they're better off confirming, IMO, and taking this issue off the table for the election cycle...

 

[B. Kidd]

He does.

And the Senate majority has an obligation - and a right - to its constituents to block unacceptable nominees,

Yes, but preemptively stating that NO nominee will be consented to is political assholery.

It would've been 30 years ago, but that was politics then as opposed to politics now. I guess you too believe like Timmy that such an animal exists like a 'moderate with a slight lean left' nominee..........only in doofus-land (where the left, does indeed reside) does such a nominee exist. In Obamanation reality, it just ain't happen'in............and you can take that to the bank!

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

He does.

And the Senate majority has an obligation - and a right - to its constituents to block unacceptable nominees,

Yes, but preemptively stating that NO nominee will be consented to is political assholery.

It may be from some points-of-view, but such points-of-view have no influence on Constitutional authority.