It's Official. No Obama nominee

[paperview]

I look forward to the Democrats putting up Political Ads showing the U.S. Constitution and pointing out that the Republican Senators are not doing the job they were elected to do. If they don't like a President Obama appointment, vote him/her down. Then they ARE doing their job. Everyone remember the last time the Republicans shut down the Government?

Then the republicans can show an ad showing in 92 Biden saying what republicans ar saying.

There is a big big difference between saying something and actually doing something. If the Republicans actually DO refuse to DO their job......those Democrat ads will be delightfully easy to produce.

So in your world, it's okay if a liberal does it. As long as a Republican doesn't. We are playing in your play book, get used to it.

No Democrat Senate ever shut down the confirmation process to prevent a Republican president from appointing a Supreme Court Justice. So no, that's not from the Democrat's playbook, this is how the right operates.

They passed a resolution to prevent the confirmation process in an election year.

No, they didn't.

 

[jknowgood]

I would agree with you normally. In this case though the REP Senators have put their political careers on the line. And they all know it.
None of them is going to cave now.
The GOP backroom boys have guaranteed that if any of them lose their seat as a result of voting against even considering an Obama nominee that Senator will be financially and politically well taken care of. They are in a no-lose situation.

I look forward to the Democrats putting up Political Ads showing the U.S. Constitution and pointing out that the Republican Senators are not doing the job they were elected to do. If they don't like a President Obama appointment, vote him/her down. Then they ARE doing their job. Everyone remember the last time the Republicans shut down the Government?

Then the republicans can show an ad showing in 92 Biden saying what republicans ar saying.

There is a big big difference between saying something and actually doing something. If the Republicans actually DO refuse to DO their job......those Democrat ads will be delightfully easy to produce.

So in your world, it's okay if a liberal does it. As long as a Republican doesn't. We are playing in your play book, get used to it.

So...chalk you up as not knowing the difference between saying you are going to do something and actually taking action.

Ok...

So you admit liberals are all talk and no action? Interesting.

 

[dannyboys]

Who the hell is Chief Justice Alito?

My bad, I apologize. I should have typed "Associate Justice".

Error on my part.


>>>>

Your thought process a little fucked up today?
Parse words all ******* day.
The FACT is Obama acted like an asshole from the day he took office.
How many of his grand 'pen and phone' EO's were struck down by the courts?
The REP Senate was duly elected to prevent such an asshole quasi-Socialist banana republic style dictator from destroying America. IT WORKED!!!!!
I guess some of that 'African method' of how to run a country worn off on him back in Kenya.
Now Obama can sit in his Oval office with the lights turned down and pick his ******* toes until Trump is inaugurated. Some 'legacy'. But then what did anyone expect when the ******* 'OJ jury' elected the First AA President'? Then Obama can do what he really wants to.
Move into the apartment above Boystown.

 

[WildBillKelsoe]

Then the republicans can show an ad showing in 92 Biden saying what republicans ar saying.

There is a big big difference between saying something and actually doing something. If the Republicans actually DO refuse to DO their job......those Democrat ads will be delightfully easy to produce.

So in your world, it's okay if a liberal does it. As long as a Republican doesn't. We are playing in your play book, get used to it.

No Democrat Senate ever shut down the confirmation process to prevent a Republican president from appointing a Supreme Court Justice. So no, that's not from the Democrat's playbook, this is how the right operates.

They passed a resolution to prevent the confirmation process in an election year.

No, they didn't.

Yes, they did...LMAO!

Flashback: Senate Democrats in 1960 pass resolution against election-year Supreme Court recess appointments

 

[paperview]

This from the guy who yesterday actually fell for a fake news story and thought Obama Executive Ordered a Muslim to the Supreme Court.

This from a guy who doesn't know that the Republicans have owned Congress, ever since Obama got elected.

And he ***** up again.

The 2010 midterms were the biggest upset in 60 years, favoring the Republicans.

You said: "Republicans have owned Congress, ever since Obama got elected"

Are forgetting 2008 -2010 -- When House and Senate were Democrat?
From 2010 to 2013 - The Dems still owned the Senate?
From 2013 to Jan 2015 - The Dems still owned the Senate?

I'm guessing you are....unless you have a different definition of *owned congress* that doesn't include the Senate, and another one that revises *since Obama got elected.*

Obama wasn't President in 2008. And, you call me stupid?...lol

I didn't say he was president in 2008, I said from 2008 -2010 -- When House and Senate were Democrat.

Any dumbfuck knows that was the election year, and Dems had all of Congress those first two years (and the prior two years too!) -- and your stupid statement: "Republicans have owned Congress, ever since Obama got elected" is stoopid.

 

[dannyboys]

Section 2 contains only one clause. Note the first sentence. '; and' does not constitute the beginning of a second clause.
The first sentence lays out the "consent" provision. Nowhere in Section 2 are the words: "simple majority".
Wise up. You're making a fool of yourself.

It's hard to talk to people that have a hard time comprehending basic English when it's written. Did they ever teach you about ";" (semicolon if you don't know that that means). A joins two related ideas (or clauses) in a sentence. Notice the semicolon between the treaties clause and the public official clause.

Secondly, if I'm wrong then explain how Associate Justice Alito was confirmed with a vote of 58-42. There are 100 Senators so 2/3rds would be 66.66 or 67 as a minimum voting to confirm and he didn't get that many votes.


The only one looking the fool is you because of basic reading issues.

>>>>

How about you go ask the President of the Stanford Law School his opinion about the legal meaning of Section 2 is.Then get back to us OK?

 

[paperview]

There is a big big difference between saying something and actually doing something. If the Republicans actually DO refuse to DO their job......those Democrat ads will be delightfully easy to produce.

So in your world, it's okay if a liberal does it. As long as a Republican doesn't. We are playing in your play book, get used to it.

No Democrat Senate ever shut down the confirmation process to prevent a Republican president from appointing a Supreme Court Justice. So no, that's not from the Democrat's playbook, this is how the right operates.

They passed a resolution to prevent the confirmation process in an election year.

No, they didn't.

Yes, they did...LMAO!

Flashback: Senate Democrats in 1960 pass resolution against election-year Supreme Court recess appointments

No, they didn't.

Read, you idiot:
Flashback: Senate Democrats in 1960 pass (non-binding, no force of law) resolution against election-year Supreme Court recess appointments.

 

[WorldWatcher]

How about you go ask the President of the Stanford Law School his opinion about the legal meaning of Section 2 is.Then get back to us OK?

Please show us where the President of the Standford Law School says that it takes a 2/3rds majority of the Senate to approve a Supreme Court Justice.

Then explain how Associate Justice Alito was confirmed with a vote of 58-42. There are 100 Senators so 2/3rds would be 66.66 or 67 as a minimum voting to confirm and he didn't get that many votes.

>>>>

 

[WildBillKelsoe]

So in your world, it's okay if a liberal does it. As long as a Republican doesn't. We are playing in your play book, get used to it.

No Democrat Senate ever shut down the confirmation process to prevent a Republican president from appointing a Supreme Court Justice. So no, that's not from the Democrat's playbook, this is how the right operates.

They passed a resolution to prevent the confirmation process in an election year.

No, they didn't.

Yes, they did...LMAO!

Flashback: Senate Democrats in 1960 pass resolution against election-year Supreme Court recess appointments

No, they didn't.

Read, you idiot:
Flashback: Senate Democrats in 1960 pass (non-binding, no force of law) resolution against election-year Supreme Court recess appointments.

Preventing recess appointments, so the Senate can vote, or not vote, as they choose.

You're embarrassing yourself by calling me an idiot, when you don't understand that.

 

[dannyboys]

Recess appointments are moot in this case.
The Senate isn't going to go into recess.
The REP controlled Senate has officially notified the ******* WORLD!! that they will not even open the envelope sent to them with Obama's nomination in it. EVER!
Obama will already be living above Boystown when Trump and his majority Senate choose the next REP SCJ.

 

[Faun]

There is a big big difference between saying something and actually doing something. If the Republicans actually DO refuse to DO their job......those Democrat ads will be delightfully easy to produce.

So in your world, it's okay if a liberal does it. As long as a Republican doesn't. We are playing in your play book, get used to it.

No Democrat Senate ever shut down the confirmation process to prevent a Republican president from appointing a Supreme Court Justice. So no, that's not from the Democrat's playbook, this is how the right operates.

They passed a resolution to prevent the confirmation process in an election year.

No, they didn't.

Yes, they did...LMAO!

Flashback: Senate Democrats in 1960 pass resolution against election-year Supreme Court recess appointments

Exactly how retarded are you?? Oh wait, aren't you the idiot that fell for that scam news website about Obama filling this vacancy with an executive order?

At any rate, that resolution did not prevent any president from appointing A Supreme Court justice. If anything, it conformed with the Constitution since the President shall appoint Supreme Court justices WITH the advice and consent of the Senant. So that resolution, unlike what the Senate is doing now, was actually constitutional.

 

[WildBillKelsoe]

This from a guy who doesn't know that the Republicans have owned Congress, ever since Obama got elected.

And he ***** up again.

The 2010 midterms were the biggest upset in 60 years, favoring the Republicans.

You said: "Republicans have owned Congress, ever since Obama got elected"

Are forgetting 2008 -2010 -- When House and Senate were Democrat?
From 2010 to 2013 - The Dems still owned the Senate?
From 2013 to Jan 2015 - The Dems still owned the Senate?

I'm guessing you are....unless you have a different definition of *owned congress* that doesn't include the Senate, and another one that revises *since Obama got elected.*

Obama wasn't President in 2008. And, you call me stupid?...lol

I didn't say he was president in 2008, I said from 2008 -2010 -- When House and Senate were Democrat.

Any dumbfuck knows that was the election year, and Dems had all of Congress those first two years (and the prior two years too!) -- and your stupid statement: "Republicans have owned Congress, ever since Obama got elected" is stoopid.

By the same token, the Democrats didn't have a majority in Congress in 2011.

Anyone who doesn't get that, is equally stoopid...yes?

 

[WildBillKelsoe]

So in your world, it's okay if a liberal does it. As long as a Republican doesn't. We are playing in your play book, get used to it.

No Democrat Senate ever shut down the confirmation process to prevent a Republican president from appointing a Supreme Court Justice. So no, that's not from the Democrat's playbook, this is how the right operates.

They passed a resolution to prevent the confirmation process in an election year.

No, they didn't.

Yes, they did...LMAO!

Flashback: Senate Democrats in 1960 pass resolution against election-year Supreme Court recess appointments

Exactly how retarded are you?? Oh wait, aren't you the idiot that fell for that scam news website about Obama filling this vacancy with an executive order?

At any rate, that resolution did not prevent any president from appointing A Supreme Court justice. If anything, it conformed with the Constitution since the President shall appoint Supreme Court justices WITH the advice and consent of the Senant. So that resolution, unlike what the Senate is doing now, was actually constitutional.

Man! Insults are all you people have...lol

Can you possibly imagine how self defeating that is?

I'm not going to use vitriol when I explain, AGAIN, that there's NOTHING in the Constitution that requires the Senate to vote witin a certain time frame.

 

[WildBillKelsoe]

Recess appointments are moot in this case.
The Senate isn't going to go into recess.
The REP controlled Senate has officially notified the ******* WORLD!! that they will not even open the envelope sent to them with Obama's nomination in it. EVER!
Obama will already be living above Boystown when Trump and his majority Senate choose the next REP SCJ.

The Libs are melting down because The Messiah isn't getting his way.

They're so desperate that they're using the race card...lol

 

[dannyboys]

How about you go ask the President of the Stanford Law School his opinion about the legal meaning of Section 2 is.Then get back to us OK?

Please show us where the President of the Standford Law School says that it takes a 2/3rds majority of the Senate to approve a Supreme Court Justice.

Then explain how Associate Justice Alito was confirmed with a vote of 58-42. There are 100 Senators so 2/3rds would be 66.66 or 67 as a minimum voting to confirm and he didn't get that many votes.

>>>>

Ever heard of a SC nomination Senate 'filibuster? Do you understand the concept of a 60 member Senate 'Supermajority'?
You ought go back and do some further research on the subject pal. Then come back OK?

 

[bodecea]

Exactly right! They're blocking Obama's commie agenda.

you know, it's getting really boring hearing idiots call things communism or socialism when they are too uneducated and ignorant to know what those economic concepts are.

moron... why don't' you just call him black which is really what you mean.

It's no mere coincidence that McConnell and the Republican Senators who are determined to not let Obama fulfill his Constitutional obligations are comprised of 8 out of 9 Senators from former slave states with the other three from states that were not yet admitted into the country when the confederacy seceded.

Nobody is stopping your ******* president from fulfilling his Constitutional obligation to NOMINATE a candidate.

Nominating a replacement isn't his only Constitutional obligation in this regard. With the Senate, he is also obligated to fill vacancies in the Supreme Court. They are denying a president from fulfilling his Constitutional responsibilities.

We are playing by the liberal playbook. Get used to it.

Nope...it's the RW "I'm pouting" playbook. The same playbook used in the "Green Eggs & Ham" shutdown. Own it. Be proud of it. It's yours.

 

[bodecea]

Section 2 contains only one clause. Note the first sentence. '; and' does not constitute the beginning of a second clause.
The first sentence lays out the "consent" provision. Nowhere in Section 2 are the words: "simple majority".
Wise up. You're making a fool of yourself.

It's hard to talk to people that have a hard time comprehending basic English when it's written. Did they ever teach you about ";" (semicolon if you don't know that that means). A joins two related ideas (or clauses) in a sentence. Notice the semicolon between the treaties clause and the public official clause.

Secondly, if I'm wrong then explain how Associate Justice Alito was confirmed with a vote of 58-42. There are 100 Senators so 2/3rds would be 66.66 or 67 as a minimum voting to confirm and he didn't get that many votes.


The only one looking the fool is you because of basic reading issues.

>>>>

U.S. Senate: Supreme Court Nominations: 1789-Present

Have a look-see at the some other simple majority votes.

Clarence Thomas just barrrrely slid in.

Samuel Alito, Jr. O'Connor Nov 10, 2005 58-42
Clarence Thomas Marshall Jul 8, 1991 52-48
Lucius Lamar Woods Dec 6, 1887 32-28
Jeremiah Black Daniel Feb 5, 1861 25-26
Nathan Clifford Curtis Dec 9, 1857 26-23
William Smith (new seat) Mar 3, 1837 23-18
Roger Taney Duvall Jan 15, 1835 24-21

Doesn't look like 2/3rds is a requirement at all.

 

[bodecea]

I look forward to the Democrats putting up Political Ads showing the U.S. Constitution and pointing out that the Republican Senators are not doing the job they were elected to do. If they don't like a President Obama appointment, vote him/her down. Then they ARE doing their job. Everyone remember the last time the Republicans shut down the Government?

Then the republicans can show an ad showing in 92 Biden saying what republicans ar saying.

There is a big big difference between saying something and actually doing something. If the Republicans actually DO refuse to DO their job......those Democrat ads will be delightfully easy to produce.

So in your world, it's okay if a liberal does it. As long as a Republican doesn't. We are playing in your play book, get used to it.

So...chalk you up as not knowing the difference between saying you are going to do something and actually taking action.

Ok...

So you admit liberals are all talk and no action? Interesting.

Ah...I see what you did there.

 

[jknowgood]

you know, it's getting really boring hearing idiots call things communism or socialism when they are too uneducated and ignorant to know what those economic concepts are.

moron... why don't' you just call him black which is really what you mean.

It's no mere coincidence that McConnell and the Republican Senators who are determined to not let Obama fulfill his Constitutional obligations are comprised of 8 out of 9 Senators from former slave states with the other three from states that were not yet admitted into the country when the confederacy seceded.

Nobody is stopping your ******* president from fulfilling his Constitutional obligation to NOMINATE a candidate.

Nominating a replacement isn't his only Constitutional obligation in this regard. With the Senate, he is also obligated to fill vacancies in the Supreme Court. They are denying a president from fulfilling his Constitutional responsibilities.

We are playing by the liberal playbook. Get used to it.

Nope...it's the RW "I'm pouting" playbook. The same playbook used in the "Green Eggs & Ham" shutdown. Own it. Be proud of it. It's yours.

Harry Reid wrote most of it. Biden in 92 also wrote a chapter.

 

[WildBillKelsoe]

you know, it's getting really boring hearing idiots call things communism or socialism when they are too uneducated and ignorant to know what those economic concepts are.

moron... why don't' you just call him black which is really what you mean.

It's no mere coincidence that McConnell and the Republican Senators who are determined to not let Obama fulfill his Constitutional obligations are comprised of 8 out of 9 Senators from former slave states with the other three from states that were not yet admitted into the country when the confederacy seceded.

Nobody is stopping your ******* president from fulfilling his Constitutional obligation to NOMINATE a candidate.

Nominating a replacement isn't his only Constitutional obligation in this regard. With the Senate, he is also obligated to fill vacancies in the Supreme Court. They are denying a president from fulfilling his Constitutional responsibilities.

We are playing by the liberal playbook. Get used to it.

Nope...it's the RW "I'm pouting" playbook. The same playbook used in the "Green Eggs & Ham" shutdown. Own it. Be proud of it. It's yours.

Last time I checked, the Republicans are the ones getting their way.

Elections have consequences...LMAO!!