Obama Now Has the Power to Appoint 93 Federal Judges

[Dante]

2015 will be a bloodbath. Look for some really nasty rules changes by the newly elected Republican Senate majority. And liberals will have no choice but to suck it up or admit their recent insanity.

by some really nasty Republicans? yeah, we already have that

 

[mudwhistle]

Well of course they were "approved" - AFTER the elections.

Why did the IRS "ask for more information" from conservatives ONLY. Conservatives who - it has been proven - had already submitted ALL information and then some? So they had an excuse to hold up the requests until after the election (and in a few cases, until right before the election when it was too late).

Want to try again RW? I love watching you guys keep trying to think of a narrative that fits the situation and which will stick.

No they didn't.

Liberal groups were targeted too.

But that didn't fall under the scope of Darrell (The firebug car thief) Issa's witch hunt.

Liberal groups were not targeted. that's bunk.

Targeting means singling out.

Yet another liberal lie is folks that had to go thru the process were also targeted. It's not the same as stringing the process out for years or just until after the election.



You know what this is?

Democrats know that when 50+ million begin to lose their health care their lib dreams will be flushed for the next decade.

 

[P@triot]

2015 will be a bloodbath. Look for some really nasty rules changes by the newly elected Republican Senate majority. And liberals will have no choice but to suck it up or admit their recent insanity.

Your side makes dire threats of retribution pretty much daily. After the hundredth repetition or so, people stopped paying attention. Yeah, whatever. Bring it on, crybabies. You'll notice the Democrats are totally unconcerned. Moderates have that luxury, since we can peel off votes from the other side and get a majority that way. Extremists like you can't do that, hence your meltdowns.

Of course, if you keep blubbering like this, you'll won't win any elections. After all, the whinysasstittybaby demographic isn't very large.

I have no clue what's going to happen at the next election [MENTION=39072]mamooth[/MENTION] (especially considering that history has taught us nobody can rig an election like the Dumbocrats can).

But that being said, you're team did receive the worst political ass-kicking in U.S. history during the 2010 mid-terms. There was a slaughter in the House that turned a Dumbocrat super-majority over to the Republicans. Nearly every governorship, mayorship, county auditor, and any other public election was a conservative landslide. Shit, even Mass-a-****'n-chusetts (the back yard of the ****'n Kennedy's) was lost to Scott Brown. Ultra liberal Wisconsin was turned over to Scott Walker, and he even won on a recall when the Dumbocrats tried to rig that election (in one city they had a voter turn out of 110% - oops! ).

The point is - your smug attitude is deranged considering recent history. *If* the next election turns out like the 2010 mid-terms, I can't wait to see all of your smug faces as you realize you pulled the only tool available to you to ensure your precious little marxism and government table scraps...

 

[mudwhistle]

2015 will be a bloodbath. Look for some really nasty rules changes by the newly elected Republican Senate majority. And liberals will have no choice but to suck it up or admit their recent insanity.

Please tell me you are kidding me HBH? Dumbocrats admit their insanity?

You do realize this is the party who has collapsed almost every nation in the world for the past 100 years with their policy of pure, unadulterated ignorance, and they still blame everything and everyone for the failure except themselves, don't you?

You have a better chance of seeing hell frozen over while Jimmy Hoffa is uncovered as a unicorn flies past over head during an alien invasion with the real JFK assassin being announced than you do of a Dumbocrat every taking personal responsibility for anything!

So you say there's a chance?

 

[P@triot]

Repetition doesn't create relevance, Dante. And i never asked about its relevance to the OP, I you offered that irrelevance off from my post. And since you're one of the biggest trolls here, i'm not going to entertain this any longer.

Poor rightwingers can't fight so they revert to attempts at marginalization

The roles of two branches of government. How they historically worked and what led to them clashing as they do now. Oh, it's nothing but trollish spam?


poor stepback, ought to look at IT's own posts and then decide who is a troll...might find a mirror in there somewhere

One thing is for certain - we find nothing but pure, unadulterated, unfettered, ignorance when Dante posts!

(This guy clearly dropped out of school before civics class was offered)

 

[NoTeaPartyPleez]

Mitch could have let Obama have 3 judges, now he can have 93 with just Democratic votes .. dumb move. <my comment.

Excellent. Well said. The ******* Republicans had it coming.

 

[P@triot]

except there is no tyranny, unprecedented or not

Let me rephrase. Taking away the filibuster option from judicial nominations is justified because of the unprecedented use of the filibuster to block them. It is not a power grab by the White House either. The charge that this is somehow Obama's tyranny is ludicrous.

thank you

Folks, I rest my case.....

Here we have an ignorant Dumbocrat claiming that a Senator should lose the authority of his position for properly exercising the authority of his position. You can't make this stuff up folks!

And, lets not forget to point out the irony of Dumbocrat contradiction. Above [MENTION=15512]Dante[/MENTION] we have a liberal jack-ass complaining about "unprecedented" use. Uh....wait....aren't you people the "progressives" who crow about "progress" and complain about the status quo? So a Senator being progressive and setting new standards and precedence is suddenly "evil" and you want to change the rules because they didn't maintain status quo you claim to hate?!?!?

You people can't even create a consistent narrative for your platform. You're a bunch of dumb monkey's hoping from one foot to the next trying to justify how you contradicted yourselves in your last statement...

Now come stupid, quick, give us a new narrative to cover up the glaring contradictions in your previous narrative!

 

[P@triot]

Mitch could have let Obama have 3 judges, now he can have 93 with just Democratic votes .. dumb move. <my comment.

Excellent. Well said. The ******* Republicans had it coming.

Indeed! Damn those Republicans for following the rules of the Senate and doing exactly what the American people elected them to do!

 

[Londoner]

It's called the Constitution. The president is empowered and obligated to fill vacancies.

The activist Rightwing court packing agenda has one premise: The Left must not be allowed to select any judges despite winning the last two elections by wide majorities.

The Right has used the filibuster to overturn the results of two elections. They will not let Obama govern. It has gotten so bad that he can only nominate Republicans to cabinet positions, like Chuck Hegal. And even then he is opposed.

The Rightwing has declared war on Obama. They have decided that he must not be allowed to do anything. This is why he has faced more filibusters than the last 12 presidents combined.

 

[rightwinger]

Well of course they were "approved" - AFTER the elections.

Why did the IRS "ask for more information" from conservatives ONLY. Conservatives who - it has been proven - had already submitted ALL information and then some? So they had an excuse to hold up the requests until after the election (and in a few cases, until right before the election when it was too late).

Want to try again RW? I love watching you guys keep trying to think of a narrative that fits the situation and which will stick.

Another mountain being built from a conservative molehill

Funny thing RW - it's the dirt-bag, Chicago-style, corrupt politics by the Dumbocrats which keeps creating the "molehills" that us conservatives are (according to you) "turning into mountains".

You know the solution to that problem RW? If you party would show some integrity for once in their entire miserable existance and stop with the thuggery, there would be no molehill and thus, no mountain to create out of it! Imagine that!

But hey - you guys never were one's to employ personal responsibility! So why start now, right? So much easier to cause the problem (like you Dumbocrats always do) and then blame the other guy for the problem you caused.

Tell us about Benghazi and Fast and Furious again

Voters can't wait to hear

 

[mamooth]

[The point is - your smug attitude is deranged considering recent history. *If* the next election turns out like the 2010 mid-terms, I can't wait to see all of your smug faces as you realize you pulled the only tool available to you to ensure your precious little marxism and government table scraps...

And if the reverse happens, we won't be able to do the same to you. Why? Because you'll act like you did in 2012. That is, you'll piss yourself and vanish for a couple months.

Most of the Republicans here did the same. Not really their fault. After all, if someone has functioning gonads, they become Democrats.

Oh, do keep up your crazy 'tard conspiracy lies that the Democrats rig elections. Crybaby lying on that scale wins votes for the Democrats, since no one wants to be associated with loser liars like you. Non-losers don't have to constantly fabricate excuses for losing.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

[The point is - your smug attitude is deranged considering recent history. *If* the next election turns out like the 2010 mid-terms, I can't wait to see all of your smug faces as you realize you pulled the only tool available to you to ensure your precious little marxism and government table scraps...

And if the reverse happens, we won't be able to do the same to you. Why? Because you'll act like you did in 2012. That is, you'll piss yourself and vanish for a couple months.

Most of the Republicans here did the same. Not really their fault. After all, if someone has functioning gonads, they become Democrats.

Oh, do keep up your crazy 'tard conspiracy lies that the Democrats rig elections. Crybaby lying on that scale wins votes for the Democrats, since no one wants to be associated with loser liars like you. Non-losers don't have to constantly fabricate excuses for losing.

Yup. Definitely Planet Moron.

 

[TemplarKormac]

So, just because Obama doesn't get to appoint the judges he wants allows him and his party to justify throwing 225 years of legislative history in the trash? Oh well, this will bite them in the ass. Democrats in Washington are notorious for not thinking things through, i.e. Obamacare.

The filibuster is not in the Constitution and was "invented" by Aaron Burr.

Remember him?

He killed founding father Alexander Hamilton.

LOL. You cite known history to me. Aaron Burr made the filibuster possible in 1789 through a fluke in the Senatorial process. There was a rarely used procedure in the Senate where they would "move to the previous question." But Burr thought the rule to be rarely used and redundant, and ordered it to be eliminated. Seventeen years later in 1806 the Senate recodified it's rules to make it possible for a filibuster to occur on the floor. Another 31 years went by before the first one actually happened.

However, James Madison, Thomas Jefferson, and Alexander Hamilton all knew of and vehemently opposed the filibuster and in the Manual of Parliamentary Procedure. The theory of a filibuster was known as early as 1787. It wasn't "invented", Sallow.

 

[Contumacious]

[


Obama Now Has the Power to Appoint 93 Federal Judges>

Who will approve every socialistic and tyrannical measure that comes down the pike. The parasites and the narcotized will nod approvingly.

.

 

[jasonnfree]

Obama just committed an unprecedented tyranny.

This represents a ridiculous power grab from one of the most tyrannical administrations in US History.

No more ridiculous than gerrymandering, without which, the dems would have taken over the house in the last election.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Conservatives, amazingly, with a straight face, can claim that the way the system should work is that GOP presidents should get to appoint judges when there's a GOP majority in the Senate,

and then, when there isn't, the GOP minority in the Senate should have the power to postpone judicial appointments until they and another Republican president are back in power.

Just when you think rightwing stupidity on this forum may have peaked, they reach another level.

 

[P@triot]

[The point is - your smug attitude is deranged considering recent history. *If* the next election turns out like the 2010 mid-terms, I can't wait to see all of your smug faces as you realize you pulled the only tool available to you to ensure your precious little marxism and government table scraps...

And if the reverse happens, we won't be able to do the same to you.

First of all, I'm not the smug one declaring future victories. Second, it was not my side of the aisle that that changed the rules to esnure there was no dissent. So no, you will not be able to say the same to me.

Why? Because you'll act like you did in 2012. That is, you'll piss yourself and vanish for a couple months.

Most of the Republicans here did the same. Not really their fault. After all, if someone has functioning gonads, they become Democrats.

So you consider someone who can't stand on their own two feet and must be a dependent of the state like a ****'n child to be someone with "functioning gonads"? Hmm...interesting.

I always find the Dumbocrat narrative to be fall down hilarious. These are the people who FEAR guns. These are the people who FEAR war (they've cried for 10 years like little bitches about Afghanistan and Iraq and barely a damn one of them has the courage to serve - the military is overwhelmingly conservative). These are the people who FEAR living without government safety nets. These are the people who FEAR starting their own business. These are the people who FEAR standing on their own two feet like adults (they want governments help and government entitlements to live). And yet, when sitting behind a keyboard protected by the internet, they are suddenly internet "tough guys" with "functioning gonads"

Sorry dude - you're afraid to even get a job and survive on your own with government cheese and government provided healthcare. You have NO grounds to stand on when it comes to having balls and being a real man. Cute fictional narrative though!

Oh, do keep up your crazy 'tard conspiracy lies that the Democrats rig elections. Crybaby lying on that scale wins votes for the Democrats, since no one wants to be associated with loser liars like you. Non-losers don't have to constantly fabricate excuses for losing.

Another personal favorite of mine from the left! For 5 years now, they've been declaring that everything I do sends voters their way. How odd that they don't have 100% of the vote by now...

Psst...mamooth...I'm going to let you in on a little secret here....shhh...this is just between me and you - ok?

If you are a spineless, sniveling little coward with no balls and are too lazy to provide for yourself, you vote Dumbocrat. If you are a real American who embraces personal responsibility, freedom, and opportunity, you vote Republican.

Absolutely, positively nothing alters that. Nothing anyone says. Nothing anyone does. Nothing anyone advertises or pitches. You either want to live life as a government dependent parasite or you do not want to live life as a government dependent parasite. It really is that simple.

Now quick - declare that this post just took 100,000 conservatives and 500,000 "independents" and made them Dumbocrat voters!

 

[P@triot]

Conservatives, amazingly, with a straight face, can claim that the way the system should work is that GOP presidents should get to appoint judges when there's a GOP majority in the Senate,

and then, when there isn't, the GOP minority in the Senate should have the power to postpone judicial appointments until they and another Republican president are back in power.

Just when you think rightwing stupidity on this forum may have peaked, they reach another level.

Can you show me where a conservative made that declaration Carby? If you can, I gladly denounce that statement by a conservative. No? Yeah, didn't think so. But hey, thanks for lying! It helps people new to USMB establish who has no credibility

 

[Trajan]

Obama just committed an unprecedented tyranny.

This represents a ridiculous power grab from one of the most tyrannical administrations in US History.

Let me ask you a question:

If the party in power in both the presidency and the Senate should not have the right to appoint and approve judges,

who should?

Please be specific and explain your reasoning in detail.

Good question.

Why the blocks when it was Bush and the Republicans trying to fill seats?

well that was 'then' this is now



The hypocrisy here should not go unnoticed. Although the filibuster for legislation has a long history, prior to 2003 it was seldom used to block executive-branch nominations — and appellate-court nominees in particular. In fact, Democrats themselves began using it this way in the 108th Congress, after they lost the Senate in the 2002 midterm elections. Here’s the backstory.

Start with Bush v. Gore, the Supreme Court’s December 2000 decision that effectively decided the presidential outcome, creating a firestorm among Democrats, especially among the legal professoriate. On January 13, 2001, for example, 554 professors from 120 law schools took out a full-page ad in the New York Times condemning the Court’s majority for having acted not as judges but as “political proponents for candidate Bush.” And at a Democratic retreat a month later Yale’s Bruce Ackerman urged members not to confirm a single Bush nominee for the Supreme Court until after the 2004 elections.

Democrats got their break in May when Vermont senator James Jeffords left the Republican party. That switched control of the Senate to the Democrats, who immediately turned their attention to the eleven appellate court nominees then before the Senate Judiciary Committee, two of them Democrats — a gesture from Bush. Those two were immediately confirmed. The rest would not even get hearings. Instead, Democrats began calling for “litmus tests” — explicit demands that nominees state their views on everything from abortion to affirmative action to Congress’s unquestioned power to regulate anything and everything.

But the near lock-down on appellate-court nominations did not end with the 2002 midterm elections, which switched control of the Senate back to the Republicans. It was then that Senate Democrats began the unprecedented filibustering of appellate-court nominations. The most egregious case was that of Miguel Estrada, whose life story was pure American dream. First nominated by President Bush in May 2001, Estrada finally withdrew his name from further consideration some 27 months later, after seven failed cloture votes in the next, 108th Congress.

Things came to a head early in the 109th Congress when Republicans themselves, still in control of the Senate, threatened finally to “go nuclear” — to end the appellate-court filibusters Democrats had introduced only in the previous Congress. That was headed off when the bipartisan “Gang of 14” reached a compromise: Democrats would filibuster nominees only in “extraordinary circumstances,” they agreed, and Republicans would not use the nuclear option. That compromise held for the rest of the 109th Congress — though not without difficulties — but it became moot after Democrats regained control of the Senate following the 2006 midterm elections since they no longer needed to filibuster Bush nominees.

In sum, after the 2000 election was decided, Senate Democrats sat on their hands for two years as Bush appellate-court nominees twisted in the wind. In the minority after the 2002 elections, those Democrats then initiated the filibuster for many of Bush’s nominees. Only after the 2005 Gang of 14 compromise was imposed did things settle down. And after the 2006 elections, Democrats no longer needed to filibuster.

more at-

Filibuster Reaction: Harry Reid?s nuclear hypocrisy

 

[rightwinger]

Conservatives, amazingly, with a straight face, can claim that the way the system should work is that GOP presidents should get to appoint judges when there's a GOP majority in the Senate,

and then, when there isn't, the GOP minority in the Senate should have the power to postpone judicial appointments until they and another Republican president are back in power.

Just when you think rightwing stupidity on this forum may have peaked, they reach another level.

Can you show me where a conservative made that declaration Carby? If you can, I gladly denounce that statement by a conservative. No? Yeah, didn't think so. But hey, thanks for lying! It helps people new to USMB establish who has no credibility

You do not dispute what he said

Republicans stacked the Washington District Court (second most powerful court in the country ) when they held the presidency. Now, they want to block nominations until they get a Republican president

So, in blocking those three nominations, they lose all 93 vacancies. Seems fair to me