Do we still need a SCOTUS?

[Wry Catcher]

Once again, there is no constitutional requirement for the senate to hold hearings before providing advice and consent. The senate meet their constitutional duty.

Fine....Let the GOP led senate do NOTHING......They have about 3 months left of their "vacation."

Oh the fantasies of regressives, how truly entertaining they are. Republicans will hold the senate.

Your use of the word regressives (is it an actual word?) is interesting, can you give examples of how progressives, liberals and democrats seek to undo the present and return to the past?

Those who seek such a movement are generally refereed to as reactionaries, and it is very apparent that the New Right seeks to undo civil rights, women's rights and the 14th Amendment to the Constitution.

Thus, if such a word exists, it is a redundancy at best, and a pejorative. At worst it is an acknowledgment by you that the evil you claim is done by progressives, liberals and Democrats, is in reality psychological transference and/or one more example of the BIG LIE common to authoritarians, who claim to support liberty even as the deny rights to others.

 

[Maryland Patriot]

Apparently, based on what pissed off conservative lawmakers in the Senate, we don't need a Supreme Court any longer. Many of them have vowed that ANY nominee by the soon to be president, Clinton, will NOT be entertained for confirmation.....keeping the present SCOTUS in a virtual 4 to 4 tie.

Of course, we all know that at least 2 liberal judges in the Court, are too old to serve many more years, and conservatives hope that the Court will boil down to a 4 to 2 right wing majority after these latter two Justices retire or die.

So, I ask, is this the peaceful transfer of power from one administration to the next that our Founders dreamed about and we have witnessed for over two centuries?

the original number of justices were 6. it kept growing through the years until it got to where it is now. But yes. originally it was one chief justice and five associate justices.

 

[OKTexas]

Once again, there is no constitutional requirement for the senate to hold hearings before providing advice and consent. The senate meet their constitutional duty.

Fine....Let the GOP led senate do NOTHING......They have about 3 months left of their "vacation."

Oh the fantasies of regressives, how truly entertaining they are. Republicans will hold the senate.

Your use of the word regressives (is it an actual word?) is interesting, can you give examples of how progressives, liberals and democrats seek to undo the present and return to the past?

Those who seek such a movement are generally refereed to as reactionaries, and it is very apparent that the New Right seeks to undo civil rights, women's rights and the 14th Amendment to the Constitution.

Thus, if such a word exists, it is a redundancy at best, and a pejorative. At worst it is an acknowledgment by you that the evil you claim is done by progressives, liberals and Democrats, is in reality psychological transference and/or one more example of the BIG LIE common to authoritarians, who claim to support liberty even as the deny rights to others.

Well child you can claim that all you want, but when you regressives want to make the US the moral equivalent of Sodom and Gomorrah, I don't think you can get more regressive than that. You know what they say about people who refuse to learn the lessons of history.

 

[nat4900]

Once again, there is no constitutional requirement for the senate to hold hearings before providing advice and consent. The senate meet their constitutional duty.

Fine....Let the GOP led senate do NOTHING......They have about 3 months left of their "vacation."

Oh the fantasies of regressives, how truly entertaining they are. Republicans will hold the senate.

Your use of the word regressives (is it an actual word?) is interesting, can you give examples of how progressives, liberals and democrats seek to undo the present and return to the past?

Those who seek such a movement are generally refereed to as reactionaries, and it is very apparent that the New Right seeks to undo civil rights, women's rights and the 14th Amendment to the Constitution.

Thus, if such a word exists, it is a redundancy at best, and a pejorative. At worst it is an acknowledgment by you that the evil you claim is done by progressives, liberals and Democrats, is in reality psychological transference and/or one more example of the BIG LIE common to authoritarians, who claim to support liberty even as the deny rights to others.

Well child you can claim that all you want, but when you regressives want to make the US the moral equivalent of Sodom and Gomorrah, I don't think you can get more regressive than that. You know what they say about people who refuse to learn the lessons of history.

WOW......soon we'llhave a "salty" Tigger....LOL

 

[Rambunctious]

Apparently, based on what pissed off conservative lawmakers in the Senate, we don't need a Supreme Court any longer. Many of them have vowed that ANY nominee by the soon to be president, Clinton, will NOT be entertained for confirmation.....keeping the present SCOTUS in a virtual 4 to 4 tie.

Of course, we all know that at least 2 liberal judges in the Court, are too old to serve many more years, and conservatives hope that the Court will boil down to a 4 to 2 right wing majority after these latter two Justices retire or die.

So, I ask, is this the peaceful transfer of power from one administration to the next that our Founders dreamed about and we have witnessed for over two centuries?

Did you just recently graduate? if so from where?

 

[OKTexas]

Once again, there is no constitutional requirement for the senate to hold hearings before providing advice and consent. The senate meet their constitutional duty.

Fine....Let the GOP led senate do NOTHING......They have about 3 months left of their "vacation."

Oh the fantasies of regressives, how truly entertaining they are. Republicans will hold the senate.

Your use of the word regressives (is it an actual word?) is interesting, can you give examples of how progressives, liberals and democrats seek to undo the present and return to the past?

Those who seek such a movement are generally refereed to as reactionaries, and it is very apparent that the New Right seeks to undo civil rights, women's rights and the 14th Amendment to the Constitution.

Thus, if such a word exists, it is a redundancy at best, and a pejorative. At worst it is an acknowledgment by you that the evil you claim is done by progressives, liberals and Democrats, is in reality psychological transference and/or one more example of the BIG LIE common to authoritarians, who claim to support liberty even as the deny rights to others.

Well child you can claim that all you want, but when you regressives want to make the US the moral equivalent of Sodom and Gomorrah, I don't think you can get more regressive than that. You know what they say about people who refuse to learn the lessons of history.

WOW......soon we'llhave a "salty" Tigger....LOL

Hah, I'm on a salt restricted diet.

 

[OKTexas]

Apparently, based on what pissed off conservative lawmakers in the Senate, we don't need a Supreme Court any longer. Many of them have vowed that ANY nominee by the soon to be president, Clinton, will NOT be entertained for confirmation.....keeping the present SCOTUS in a virtual 4 to 4 tie.

Of course, we all know that at least 2 liberal judges in the Court, are too old to serve many more years, and conservatives hope that the Court will boil down to a 4 to 2 right wing majority after these latter two Justices retire or die.

So, I ask, is this the peaceful transfer of power from one administration to the next that our Founders dreamed about and we have witnessed for over two centuries?

Did you just recently graduate? if so from where?

6th Grade.

 

[my2¢]

I would believe that if a new justice isn't approved in reasonable time that the citizens will decide it doesn't need this congress.

 

[Rambunctious]

I would believe that if a new justice isn't approved in reasonable time that the citizens will decide it doesn't need this congress.

Well we are about to decide progressives are not needed nor wanted.

 

[nat4900]

I would believe that if a new justice isn't approved in reasonable time that the citizens will decide it doesn't need this congress.

Its been over NINE months since Scalia met his devils.......Its high time next year to get a new justice to the SCOTUS....and way or another, it will be done.

 

[Rambunctious]

Its been over NINE months since Scalia met his devils.......Its high time next year to get a new justice to the SCOTUS....and way or another, it will be done

Did you miss the list that the future president Mr. Trump released last month? Of course Hillary won't dare release her list because it will be so far left as to even scare democrats.

 

[Avatar4321]

You understand we still have a supreme Court and judicial branch whether any appointments are made or not, right?

And if Hillary does win it may be prudent to continue blocking until Kaine takes over at least

 

[Avatar4321]

I would believe that if a new justice isn't approved in reasonable time that the citizens will decide it doesn't need this congress.

Its been over NINE months since Scalia met his devils.......Its high time next year to get a new justice to the SCOTUS....and way or another, it will be done.

If you want one that badly Obama court nominate Ted Cruz. I doubt the Senate would block him.

 

[nat4900]

If you want one that badly Obama court nominate Ted Cruz. I doubt the Senate would block him.

true........since all republicans in the senate hate his guts anyway, they'd want to get rid of him.

 

[TooTall]

I would believe that if a new justice isn't approved in reasonable time that the citizens will decide it doesn't need this congress.

I believe if a new Justice isn't approved in reasonable time that the citizens will decide we can get along just fine without another one.

 

[LeftofLeft]

Apparently, based on what pissed off conservative lawmakers in the Senate, we don't need a Supreme Court any longer. Many of them have vowed that ANY nominee by the soon to be president, Clinton, will NOT be entertained for confirmation.....keeping the present SCOTUS in a virtual 4 to 4 tie.

Of course, we all know that at least 2 liberal judges in the Court, are too old to serve many more years, and conservatives hope that the Court will boil down to a 4 to 2 right wing majority after these latter two Justices retire or die.

So, I ask, is this the peaceful transfer of power from one administration to the next that our Founders dreamed about and we have witnessed for over two centuries?

Ted Kennedy is laughing at you.

 

[Rambunctious]

If you think the Saudi's should be the one's to choose our supreme court justices than vote for their lackey...Hillary.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Once again, there is no constitutional requirement for the senate to hold hearings before providing advice and consent. The senate meet their constitutional duty.

Fine....Let the GOP led senate do NOTHING......They have about 3 months left of their "vacation."

Oh the fantasies of regressives, how truly entertaining they are. Republicans will hold the senate.

Your use of the word regressives (is it an actual word?) is interesting, can you give examples of how progressives, liberals and democrats seek to undo the present and return to the past?

Those who seek such a movement are generally refereed to as reactionaries, and it is very apparent that the New Right seeks to undo civil rights, women's rights and the 14th Amendment to the Constitution.

Thus, if such a word exists, it is a redundancy at best, and a pejorative. At worst it is an acknowledgment by you that the evil you claim is done by progressives, liberals and Democrats, is in reality psychological transference and/or one more example of the BIG LIE common to authoritarians, who claim to support liberty even as the deny rights to others.

Well child you can claim that all you want, but when you regressives want to make the US the moral equivalent of Sodom and Gomorrah, I don't think you can get more regressive than that. You know what they say about people who refuse to learn the lessons of history.

"Well child"? ... well fuck you!! God isn't on your side asshole, If S/He created every living thing S/He created those you hate, and if Jesus is the Son of God he preached love, not bigotry. Bigotry, prejudice and hate are artifacts of man, and assholes like you preach hate.

 

[whitehall]

Another example of left wing logic? The left claims that republicans refuse to confirm a supreme court justice nominated by a lame duck administration because they "think we don't need a Supreme Court any longer". How idiotic can the desperate left become before they are off the freaking charts? Historically it seems that the left's favorite president, FDR, was the only president in modern history who tried to stack the Supreme Court with an additional dozen freaking jerks before even democrat loyalists as well as republicans questioned his sanity. FDR even got away with the nomination of a KKK member to the Court, Justice Black, who thanked him by writing the majority decision that authorized FDR to incarcerate American citizens without due process.

 

[Borillar]

When is the last time Pelosi didn't bow to the democrats?

Pelosi bows to herself? She's the Democratic House minority leader. Who the fuck else is she supposed to represent? The alt-right? When is the last time McChinless or Eddie Munster didn't represent their ilk?